# The Brothers Karamazov, Smerdyakov with a Guitar

Братья Карамазовы · Fyodor Dostoevsky · Book V — Pro and Contra

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b5-c2. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/karamazov/b5-c2.json.


Да и некогда было ему.  
And besides, there had been no time for it.
> A dative-subject impersonal: There is no nominative subject here: «некогда» (there is no time) is an impersonal predicate, the past is carried by the neuter «было», and the person affected stands in the dative «ему» (for him). This experiencer-in-the-dative frame is one of Russian's most characteristic ways of stating a state rather than an act.
> «Да и» as a connective opener: «Да» here is not "yes" but a loose narrative connector, and «да и» together means "and besides, what's more." Opening a sentence this way mimics the unbuttoned flow of speech and thought, tacking an afterthought onto what came before.

У него блеснула мысль, еще когда он прощался с Lise.  
A thought had flashed through him while he was still saying goodbye to Lise.
> Perfective «блеснула» — a single flash: «Блеснула» is the perfective past of «блеснуть» (to flash, gleam once), against the imperfective «блестеть» (to shine, glint continually). The perfective seizes the thought as one instantaneous event — it flashed up and was there — exactly suiting a sudden idea.
> Imperfective «прощался» — an action still in progress: The reflexive imperfective past «прощался» (was saying goodbye) sets a stretch of ongoing time as the backdrop against which the perfective «блеснула» strikes. This is the classic novelistic interplay: a process in the imperfective, interrupted by a single perfective event.

Мысль о том: как бы самым хитрейшим образом поймать сейчас брата Дмитрия, от него, очевидно, скрывающегося?  
The thought of how he might, by the most cunning means, catch his brother Dmitri right now, who was so plainly hiding from him.
> «как бы» + infinitive — how one might: «Как бы… поймать» pairs the irrealis particle «бы» with a bare infinitive to muse over a hypothetical course of action: "how one might catch." The «бы» tilts the whole clause from fact toward possibility, framing Alyosha's calculating, not-yet-acted plan.
> A doubled, bookish superlative: «Хитрейший» is already a superlative formed with the bookish suffix -ейш- (most cunning), and «самым» piles the analytic superlative on top of it — a deliberate, almost over-egged "by the very most cunning means." The redundancy gives the phrase a self-conscious, ornate ring.
> A present active participle: «скрывающегося»: «Скрывающегося» is the present active participle of the reflexive «скрываться» (to be hiding), declined into the accusative to agree with «брата Дмитрия» (animate masculine, whose accusative is syncretic with the genitive) and govern «от него». It packs a whole который-clause — "who was hiding from him" — into a single modifier, the hallmark of literary description.

Было уже не рано, был час третий пополудни.  
It was no longer early; it was past two, going on three in the afternoon.
> Inverted noun-numeral: "going on three": Putting the ordinal after the noun — «час третий» rather than «третий час» — is an idiom of approximation: not "three o'clock" but "the third hour," i.e. some time after two and heading toward three. The inversion itself signals the rough, in-between reading.
> «пополудни» — "in the afternoon": A fused, slightly bookish adverb («по» + «полудни», after midday) meaning "p.m., in the afternoon," with its counterpart «пополуночи» for the small hours. It belongs to the formal, time-telling register rather than everyday speech.

Всем существом своим Алеша стремился в монастырь к своему «великому» умирающему, но потребность видеть брата Дмитрия пересилила всё: в уме Алеши с каждым часом нарастало убеждение о неминуемой ужасной катастрофе, готовой совершиться.  
With his whole being Alyosha was straining toward the monastery, toward his “great one” who lay dying, yet the need to see his brother Dmitri overpowered everything: hour by hour, the conviction kept mounting in Alyosha's mind that some inescapable, dreadful catastrophe was about to come to pass.
> Instrumental of manner + reflexive «свой»: «Всем существом» is an instrumental of manner — "with his whole being" — and «своим» is the reflexive possessive pointing back to the clause's subject, Alyosha. Fronting this heavy instrumental phrase throws emphatic weight onto the totality of his yearning.
> Perfective «пересилила» decides the contest: The prefix пере- (over-, out-) on «силить» yields a perfective verb meaning "overpowered, won out over." The perfective marks the inner struggle as resolved in a single decisive turn — the need to see Dmitri "overpowered everything."
> Imperfective «нарастало» — a mounting process: «Нарастало» (kept mounting, was growing) is imperfective, and with «с каждым часом» (hour by hour) it stresses repeated, accumulating action — the conviction does not arrive at once but swells. Note the topic-comment order: the verb precedes its subject «убеждение», foregrounding the process itself.
> Participle + reflexive infinitive: «Готовой» (ready) agrees with «катастрофе» in the prepositional case (governed by «о»: убеждение… о… катастрофе), not the genitive, and governs the reflexive infinitive «совершиться» (to come to pass, happen of itself). The -ся here is the "middle" use: the catastrophe is poised to occur on its own, with no named agent.

В чем именно состояла катастрофа и что хотел бы он сказать сию минуту брату, может быть, он и сам бы не определил.  
What exactly the catastrophe consisted of, and what he would want to say to his brother at this very minute, perhaps even he himself could not have defined.
> Conditional «хотел бы» — what he would want: «Хотел бы» is the conditional: past-tense «хотел» plus the particle «бы», giving "would want." Here «бы» follows the verb directly, but it is mobile and could lean elsewhere; it shifts the wish from fact into the hypothetical.
> A counterfactual «бы не определил»: A second conditional closes the sentence: «не определил бы» means "could not have defined / would not have been able to define." The added «и сам» ("even he himself") and the emphatic particle «и» heighten the sense that the feeling outruns even the one who feels it.

«Пусть благодетель мой умрет без меня, но по крайней мере я не буду укорять себя всю жизнь, что, может быть, мог бы что спасти и не спас, прошел мимо, торопился в свой дом.  
“Let my benefactor die without me, but at least I will not have to reproach myself my whole life that, perhaps, I could have saved something and did not, that I passed by, hurrying home to my own house.
> «Пусть» + perfective future as a concession: «Пусть умрёт» uses the particle «пусть» with a third-person perfective future to form a let-clause: "let him die" — here a bitter concession, "even if he should die." «Пусть» builds the third-person imperative, conceding the worst before the «но».
> Compound future + reflexive «себя»: «Не буду укорять» is the imperfective compound future (the future of «быть» plus the imperfective infinitive), naming an ongoing future state — "I will not be reproaching myself." «Себя» is the full reflexive pronoun, the object distinct from the verb, pointing back to the speaker.
> Conditional regret «мог бы… и не спас»: «Мог бы спасти» (could have saved) is conditional, then the bare perfective past «не спас» (did not save) states the bitter fact — the contrast of what was possible against what was done. The colloquial «что» here stands for «что-то / что-нибудь» (something).

Делая так, по его великому слову сделаю…»  
By doing this, I will be acting according to his great word…”
> Imperfective gerund «делая» — "by doing so": «Делая» is the imperfective present деепричастие (adverbial participle) of «делать», expressing an action simultaneous with the main verb and sharing its subject: "in/by doing this, I will be acting…" This non-finite verb-adverb is a staple of the elevated, sermon-like cadence Alyosha falls into.

План его состоял в том, чтобы захватить брата Дмитрия нечаянно, а именно: перелезть, как вчера, через тот плетень, войти в сад и засесть в ту беседку.  
His plan was to take his brother Dmitri unawares—namely, to climb over that same wattle fence, as he had yesterday, slip into the garden, and lie in wait inside the summer-house.
> «в том, чтобы» + infinitive — the content of the plan: «Состоял в том, чтобы захватить» uses the correlative «в том» pointing forward to a «чтобы»-clause that here takes an infinitive: "consisted in this: to seize…" «Чтобы» introduces a willed or purposed outcome, the standard frame for spelling out an intention.
> A chain of perfectives = the steps of a plan: Three perfective infinitives line up — «перелезть» (climb over), «войти» (go in), «засесть» (settle in to wait) — each naming a single completed step. The perfectives stage the plan as a sequence of discrete, finished actions rather than ongoing process.
> «плетень» — a wattle fence: A «плетень» is a fence woven from pliable rods or branches, the humble wickerwork enclosure of a peasant or provincial yard. The word grounds the scene in a modest, rural-edge setting — a fence one can simply climb over.
> «беседка» — a garden summer-house: A «беседка» is a small open garden pavilion or arbour, a place to sit and talk (the root «бесед-» is "conversation"). It is the chapter's stage and its title-fixture; Alyosha lies in wait inside it.

«Если же его там нет, — думал Алеша, — то, не сказавшись ни Фоме, ни хозяйкам, притаиться и ждать в беседке хотя бы до вечера.  
“And if he is not there,” thought Alyosha, “then, without telling either Foma or the women of the house, I will hide and wait in the summer-house, even until evening.
> Genitive of negation: «его… нет»: A negated existential takes the genitive: «его нет» literally "of-him there-is-not" = "he is not there." The subject of «нет» obligatorily appears in the genitive «его». The particle «же» adds a mild "and as for…," turning to the next contingency.
> Negated gerund with double «ни… ни»: «Не сказавшись» is a perfective past gerund of the reflexive «сказаться» (to announce oneself), "without telling." The negative concord «ни… ни» ("neither… nor") pairs with the negated verb, and the people told stand in the dative «Фоме», «хозяйкам».
> Concessive «хотя бы» — "even until": «Хотя бы» is a concessive idiom built on «бы», meaning "if only, even, at least" — here "even until evening," conceding however long the wait must run. The infinitives «притаиться» (perfective, to take cover) and «ждать» (imperfective, to keep waiting) contrast a single move with the ongoing vigil that follows.
> «хозяйка» — landlady, woman of the house: «Хозяйка» is the feminine of «хозяин» (master, owner): the woman who keeps or owns the house, here the landlady and her household. The translation's "the women of the house" renders the plural; the daughter Marya Kondratyevna is one of them.

Если он по-прежнему караулит приход Грушеньки, то очень может быть, что и придет в беседку…»  
If he is still keeping watch for Grushenka to come, then it is very likely he will turn up at the summer-house…”
> Perfective future «придёт» — a single arrival: «Придёт» is the perfective (simple) future of «прийти» — a conjugated form with future meaning and no auxiliary, naming one completed arrival: "he will turn up." The emphatic «и» ("even, indeed") underlines the likelihood. The base verb «прийти» is a prefixed motion verb (при- + идти).
> «караулить» — to keep watch, lie in wait: «Караулить» (to guard, stand watch, lie in wait for) comes from «караул», a sentry's guard-duty (a Turkic loan). Used of Dmitri watching for Grushenka's arrival, it carries a faint sense of jealous, predatory vigilance.

Алеша, впрочем, не рассуждал слишком много о подробностях плана, но он решил его исполнить, хотя бы пришлось и в монастырь не попасть сегодня…  
Alyosha, for that matter, did not reason out the details of the plan at any great length, but he resolved to carry it through, even if it meant not getting to the monastery today…
> «впрочем» — a hedging "however": «Впрочем» is a parenthetical discourse word meaning "however, then again, for that matter," used to qualify or step back from what was just said. It is one of the narrator's favourite hinges, slipping in a reservation mid-thought.
> Concessive «хотя бы» with impersonal «пришлось»: «Хотя бы пришлось» means "even if it should come to it," a concession built on «бы». «Пришлось» is an impersonal perfective ("it became necessary, one had to") with no nominative subject, the implied experiencer in the dative — "even if [he] had to not get to the monastery."

Всё произошло без помехи: он перелез плетень почти в том самом месте, как вчера, и скрытно пробрался в беседку.  
Everything came off without a hitch: he climbed over the wattle fence at almost the very spot where he had yesterday, and stole his way into the summer-house.
> Two perfectives carry the action forward: «Перелез» (climbed over) and «пробрался» (made his way, stole through) are both perfective pasts moving the narrative event by event. The prefixes пере- (across) and про- (through) lend each verb its precise trajectory — over the fence, through into the summer-house.
> «без помехи» — "without a hitch": «Помеха» is an obstacle, hindrance, or interference; «без помехи» (in the genitive after «без») means "without obstruction, smoothly." The phrase quietly sets up the irony that the careful, frictionless approach is about to be undone by a sneeze.

Ему не хотелось, чтоб его заметили: и хозяйка, и Фома (если он тут) могли держать сторону брата и слушаться его приказаний, а стало быть, или в сад Алешу не пустить, или брата предуведомить вовремя, что его ищут и спрашивают.  
He did not want to be noticed: both the landlady and Foma (if he were here) might take his brother's side and obey his orders, and so either not let Alyosha into the garden, or warn his brother in good time that he was being looked for and asked after.
> Dative-subject «ему не хотелось» + «чтоб»-clause: «Ему не хотелось» is a quintessential impersonal: the experiencer in the dative «ему», the verb in invariable neuter-reflexive form, no nominative subject — "he did not feel like / want." It governs a «чтоб(ы)»-clause whose verb «заметили» stands in the past form required after «чтобы».
> Indefinite "they": agentless third-person plural: «Заметили» (they would notice) has no stated subject — a bare third-person plural used impersonally, like English "be noticed." The string of perfective infinitives «не пустить» (not let in), «предуведомить» (warn in advance) lays out the feared outcomes as discrete possibilities.
> «держать сторону» — to take someone's side: An idiom: «держать сторону (кого-то)» means "to side with, take the part of" someone — here, take Dmitri's side. Compare the modern «принять/взять сторону»; the «держать» variant is the older, more literary turn.

В беседке никого не было.  
There was no one in the summer-house.
> Genitive of negation + negative concord: «Никого не было» is a textbook double pattern: the negative pronoun «никого» (nobody, genitive) and the negated «не было» work in concord — "there was no one." The absent person obligatorily takes the genitive with «не было», and «ни-» word and «не» both appear.

Алеша сел на свое вчерашнее место и начал ждать.  
Alyosha sat down in his place from yesterday and began to wait.
> Perfective onset + imperfective infinitive: «Сел» (perfective, sat down) marks a single completed action; «начал ждать» pairs the perfective «начал» (began) with the imperfective infinitive «ждать» (to wait). Phase verbs like «начать» take the imperfective, since one begins an ongoing process, not a completed one.

Он оглядел беседку, она показалась ему почему-то гораздо более ветхою, чем вчера, дрянною такою показалась ему в этот раз.  
He looked the summer-house over; for some reason it struck him as far more decrepit than the day before—a wretched little thing it seemed to him this time.
> Comparative «более ветхою» + instrumental predicate: «Более ветхою» is the analytic (attributive-style) comparative "more decrepit," intensified by «гораздо» ("far"). Both predicate adjectives stand in the instrumental — «ветхою», «дрянною» — because «показаться» (to seem) takes an instrumental complement; the -ою endings are the older bookish feminine instrumental.
> «ветхий» and «дрянной» — decrepit and trashy: «Ветхий» means "decrepit, dilapidated, time-worn" (the same word as in «Ветхий Завет», the Old Testament). «Дрянной» is colloquial and contemptuous — "trashy, worthless, wretched," from «дрянь» (rubbish, trash). Together they paint the summer-house as suddenly shabby in Alyosha's anxious eyes.

День был, впрочем, такой же ясный, как и вчера.  
The day, however, was just as clear as it had been yesterday.
> Correlative «такой же… как» — "just as… as": «Такой же… как (и)» is the standard equative frame: "just the same… as." «Такой» agrees with «день» in gender and number, «же» fixes the sense of sameness, and the «и» before «вчера» adds "as it was yesterday too."

На зеленом столе отпечатался кружок от вчерашней, должно быть, расплескавшейся рюмки с коньяком.  
On the green table a ring had been left, the mark of a glass of cognac that must have been spilled the day before.
> Reflexive «отпечатался» — a self-acting middle: «Отпечататься» (-ся on «отпечатать», to imprint) is here the middle/intransitive use: the ring "got imprinted, was left" on the table, with no agent named. The -ся turns a transitive "print" into "became printed," letting the mark appear on its own.
> Past active participle: «расплескавшейся»: «Расплескавшейся» is the past active participle of the reflexive perfective «расплескаться» (to slop over, spill), declined into the genitive to agree with «рюмки» after «от». It compresses "of a glass that had spilled" into one word — the participial economy typical of descriptive prose.
> «рюмка» of «коньяк» — a stemmed shot-glass of cognac: A «рюмка» is a small stemmed glass for spirits, not a tumbler. «Коньяк» (cognac/brandy) signals a touch of pretension to refinement on the bench — and the ring it leaves is a small forensic clue to yesterday's gathering.

Пустые и непригодные к делу мысли, как и всегда во время скучного ожидания, лезли ему в голову: например, почему он, войдя теперь сюда, сел именно точь-в-точь на то самое место, на котором вчера сидел, и почему не на другое?  
Idle, useless thoughts crept into his head, as they always do during a dull wait: why, for instance, on coming in here now, had he sat down in precisely the same exact spot where he had sat yesterday, and not in another?
> Imperfective «лезли» of habit + dative «ему»: «Лезли» (imperfective, were climbing/creeping in) with «как… всегда» (as always) conveys habitual, repeated action — thoughts that keep intruding. «Ему в голову» uses the dative «ему» ("into his head"), the experiencer to whom the thoughts come.
> Perfective gerund «войдя» — "on coming in": «Войдя» is the perfective past деепричастие of «войти» (to enter), expressing an action completed just before the main verb: "on coming in, having come in." It shares the subject (he) and tightly subordinates the entering to the sitting-down that the clause asks about.
> Relative «который» in the prepositional: «На котором» is the relative pronoun «который» governed by «на» into the prepositional case (location), agreeing in gender/number with its antecedent «место» but taking the case its own clause demands: "the spot on which he had sat."
> «точь-в-точь» — "exactly, to a T": A reduplicative, emphatic adverb (from «точка», point) meaning "precisely, identically, to the very spot." Its idle insistence on exactness suits the trivial, circling thoughts of a bored wait that the sentence is describing.

Наконец ему стало очень грустно, грустно от тревожной неизвестности.  
At last he grew very sad—sad with the anxiousness of not knowing.
> Dative-subject mood: «ему стало грустно»: «Ему стало грустно» is impersonal: the experiencer «ему» in the dative, «грустно» an invariable predicate-adverb of feeling, and «стало» (perfective "became") marking the onset of the state — "he grew sad." There is no nominative subject; the sadness simply comes over him.
> «неизвестность» — the dread of not knowing: «Неизвестность» (literally "un-known-ness," from «известный», known) is the state of suspense, uncertainty, not knowing what will happen; «тревожная» (anxious, alarming) sharpens it. The genitive after «от» gives the cause of the sadness — sad "from" the anxious suspense.

Но не просидел он и четверти часа, как вдруг, очень где-то вблизи, послышался аккорд гитары.  
But he had not been sitting there even a quarter of an hour when suddenly, somewhere very near, the chord of a guitar sounded.
> «не успел…, как» frame: scarcely had he…: «Не просидел… и четверти часа, как…» is an idiomatic "he had not been sitting even a quarter-hour when…" construction. The negated perfective «не просидел» sets a barely-elapsed span, and «как» springs the sudden interrupting event. The emphatic «и» means "even."
> Genitive of measure: «четверти часа»: Both nouns sit in the genitive: «четверти» (quarter) governs «часа» (of an hour) — "a quarter of an hour." The genitive is the case of "of" and of the part-of-a-whole, here doubly so within a measure phrase.
> Reflexive «послышался» — a sound made itself heard: «Послышаться» (-ся on «послышать») means "to be heard, to sound, reach the ear," an intransitive middle: the chord "sounded" of itself. Verb-before-subject order («послышался аккорд») presents the new, story-launching information last.

Сидели или только сейчас уселся кто-то шагах от него в двадцати, никак не дальше, где-нибудь в кустах.  
Someone had been sitting there, or had only just sat down, about twenty paces from him, no farther, somewhere in the bushes.
> Imperfective vs perfective: «сидели» / «уселся»: The narrator weighs two readings of the sound: «сидели» (imperfective, "had been sitting," an ongoing state) versus «уселся» (perfective, "had just sat down," a single completed settling). The aspect choice itself does the work of distinguishing a continuing situation from a fresh event.
> «кто-то» — a specific but unknown someone: «Кто-то» = «кто» + the particle «-то», marking a referent that is real and particular but not yet identified — "someone" who is definitely there, though Alyosha cannot yet name him. Contrast «кто-нибудь» (anyone at all), which would not fit a real, present person.
> Approximation by inversion: «в двадцати»: Putting «в двадцати» ("about twenty") after «шагах» rather than before signals approximation — "some twenty paces off." Numerals over four take the genitive plural, here governed within a prepositional phrase of distance. The split word order scatters the phrase for a vague, groping feel.

У Алеши вдруг мелькнуло воспоминание, что, уходя вчера от брата из беседки, он увидел, или как бы мелькнула пред ним влево у забора садовая зеленая низенькая старая скамейка между кустами.  
A recollection suddenly flickered up in Alyosha: that yesterday, as he was leaving his brother and the summer-house, he had seen—or as if there had flashed before him—off to the left, by the fence, a low, old green garden bench among the bushes.
> «у + genitive» possessor + perfective «мелькнуло»: «У Алеши… мелькнуло воспоминание» frames the memory as something that flickered up "with/in" Alyosha — the «у»-phrase (genitive «Алеши») marks the locus of the experience, while perfective «мелькнуло» seizes it as one instantaneous flash. The subject «воспоминание» trails the verb, the news of the sentence.
> Imperfective gerund «уходя» — "as he was leaving": «Уходя» is the imperfective present деепричастие of «уходить» (to be leaving), setting the simultaneous backdrop "as he was leaving." «Уходить/уйти» is a prefixed motion verb (у- + ходить), the prefix giving "away from." The gerund shares the subject of the recalled clause.
> A stacked string of agreeing adjectives: Four long-form adjectives — «садовая зелёная низенькая старая» — all agree with «скамейка» in feminine nominative singular, piling up before the noun. «Низенькая» carries the diminutive-affectionate suffix -еньк- ("low little"), softening the picture of the old green garden bench.

На ней-то, стало быть, и уселись теперь гости.  
It was on it, then, that the visitors had now settled themselves.
> Emphatic «-то» + fronted location: Fronting «на ней» (on it) and tacking on the emphatic clitic «-то» foregrounds the bench as the established topic: "it was on it, precisely, that…" The reinforcing «и» before the perfective «уселись» (settled themselves) adds "that's just where" they sat.
> «стало быть» — "so then, therefore": A fossilized inferential phrase (literally "it became to be") meaning "so, then, consequently." It is a colloquial-deductive connector, here threading Alyosha's piecing-together of who is on the bench.

Кто же?  
But who?
> Interrogative «кто» + the particle «же»: «Кто же?» is the interrogative pronoun «кто» (who) sharpened by the emphatic particle «же»: "but who, then?" «Же» injects insistence and curiosity that bare «кто?» would lack — the breathless press of Alyosha's question.

Один мужской голос вдруг запел сладенькою фистулою куплет, аккомпанируя себе на гитаре:  
A man's voice suddenly struck up a verse in a sugary falsetto, accompanying himself on the guitar:
> Perfective «запел» + imperfective gerund «аккомпанируя»: «Запел» (perfective, struck up, with за- marking the inception of singing) names the start of the song as one event; «аккомпанируя» is the imperfective gerund "accompanying," an ongoing attendant action sharing the subject. «Себе» is the reflexive in the dative — accompanying "himself."
> «фистула» — a falsetto, in a cloying voice: «Фистула» (from Latin) is an old word for a head-voice or falsetto. «Сладенькою» (instrumental of manner) is «сладкий» (sweet) plus the diminutive-pejorative -еньк-, "sugary, cloyingly sweet" — the affected, oily quality the narrator hears in Smerdyakov's singing.
> «куплет» — a verse / couplet of a song: A «куплет» (French couplet) is a verse or stanza of a sung song, often of a light or sentimental kind. Smerdyakov's куплеты are the cheap, mawkish romances that the chapter (and Smerdyakov himself, scorning verse) sets against real poetry.

Непобедимой силой
Привержен я к милой.
Господи пом-и-илуй
Ее и меня!
Ее и меня!
Ее и меня!  
By a power none can master
I cleave to my dear one.
Lord, ha-a-ave mercy
On her and on me!
On her and on me!
On her and on me!
> Short-form adjective «привержен» as predicate: «Привержен» is the short (predicative) form of «приверженный» (devoted, attached), used here as a predicate with «к милой» (to my dear one). Short forms can only predicate, never modify, and carry a bookish, song-like solemnity well suited to the lyric.

Голос остановился.  
The voice stopped.
> Reflexive «остановился» — came to a stop: «Остановиться» (-ся on «остановить», to stop something) is the intransitive/middle: the voice "stopped" of itself, not stopped by an agent. The pair «остановить / остановиться» neatly shows how -ся turns a transitive into its intransitive twin.

Лакейский тенор и выверт песни лакейский.  
A lackey's tenor, and the affected twist of the song a lackey's too.
> A verbless sentence with framing repetition: There is no verb at all — Russian needs no copula in the present, so two noun phrases simply stand as the narrator's verdict. «Лакейский» (lackey-ish) is repeated at the start and the end, bracketing the line so the contempt rings twice.
> «выверт» — an affected twist or flourish: «Выверт» (from «вывернуть», to twist out) means a mannered contortion, an affected flourish — applied to the song, a tasteless, showy curlicue. Together with «лакейский» it brands Smerdyakov's performance as the strained refinement of a servant aping his betters.

Другой, женский уже, голос вдруг произнес ласкательно и как бы робко, но с большим, однако, жеманством:  
Another voice, a woman's this time, suddenly spoke up, coaxing and as if shy, yet with a great deal of coyness all the same:
> Manner adverbs + instrumental «с жеманством»: The way of speaking is stacked up: adverbs «ласкательно» (caressingly), «робко» (shyly), then «с большим… жеманством» — the preposition «с» with the instrumental «жеманством» (with great affectation). «С» + instrumental is the standard way to add an accompanying manner.
> «жеманство» — coyness, mincing affectation: «Жеманство» is studied coquettish affectation — simpering, mincing, putting on airs. The narrator catches Marya Kondratyevna's would-be-genteel manner exactly; «жеманный» / «жеманиться» belong to the same root of affected daintiness.

— Что вы к нам долго не ходите, Павел Федорович, что вы нас всё презираете?  
“Why is it you don't come to see us for so long, Pavel Fyodorovich? Why is it you keep looking down on us?”
> Imperfective «не ходите» of habit + «что» as "why": «Ходите» is the imperfective multidirectional motion verb «ходить» (to go, visit, habitually), negated to mean "you don't come (to see us)." Here «Что вы…» is colloquial for «Почему вы…» ("why is it you…"). The multidirectional ходить, not идти, is right for repeated visits.

— Ничего-с, — ответил мужской голос, хотя и вежливо, но прежде всего с настойчивым и твердым достоинством.  
“It's nothing, ma'am,” answered the man's voice, politely enough, but above all with an insistent, firm dignity.
> The deferential particle -с ("словоерс"): Smerdyakov constantly tacks the particle «-с» onto his words («ничего-с», «вздор-с», «не выдавайте-с»). This is the “словоерс,” a contraction of «сударь» (“sir”) once added to show servile politeness. It marks him as a lackey straining to sound respectful and educated. It has no real English equivalent, so we render it with a tacked-on “sir” or “ma'am” where it fits, but in Russian it colours nearly every line he speaks.
> Instrumental of manner: «с… достоинством»: «С настойчивым и твёрдым достоинством» — «с» plus the instrumental — names the manner of his answer: "with an insistent, firm dignity." The two adjectives agree with «достоинством» in the instrumental (-ым). This is the everyday way Russian turns a quality into "with X-ness."

Видимо, преобладал мужчина, а заигрывала женщина.  
Clearly the man had the upper hand, and the woman was the one doing the flirting.
> Contrastive «а» balancing two clauses: The conjunction «а» sets the two halves in gentle parallel contrast — "the man dominated, while the woman flirted" — not opposition so much as a shift of focus from one party to the other. The verb-first order in each clause throws weight onto the actions; both verbs are imperfective, describing a standing state of affairs.
> «заигрывать» — to flirt, make advances: «Заигрывать (с кем-то)» means to flirt with, make playful overtures to. The imperfective stresses the ongoing coquetry; with «преобладал» it sums up the power balance the eavesdropping Alyosha reads off the unseen pair.

«Мужчина — это, кажется, Смердяков, — подумал Алеша, — по крайней мере по голосу, а дама — это, верно, хозяйки здешнего домика дочь, которая из Москвы приехала, платье со шлейфом носит и за супом к Марфе Игнатьевне ходит…»  
“The man—that, it seems, is Smerdyakov,” thought Alyosha, “by the voice at least; and the lady—that must be the daughter of the woman who owns this little house, the one who came from Moscow, wears a dress with a train, and goes to Marfa Ignatyevna's for soup…”
> A chain of genitives + diminutive «домика»: The possession stacks up in the genitive: «хозяйки… домика дочь» = "the daughter of the landlady of the local little house." «Домик» is «дом» with the diminutive -ик ("little house"), and «здешний» means "of this place, hereabouts." The heaped genitives mimic Alyosha's groping identification.
> Relative «которая» heading a participle-like clause: «Которая» (who, fem. nom.) introduces a relative clause describing the daughter, agreeing in gender/number with its antecedent and taking the nominative as the subject of its own clause. The string of imperfective verbs «носит», «ходит» paints habitual traits — she wears, she goes regularly.

— Ужасно я всякий стих люблю, если складно, — продолжал женский голос. — Что же вы не продолжаете?  
“I'm awfully fond of any kind of verse, if it scans nicely,” the woman's voice went on. “Why don't you go on?”
> Emphatic fronting of «ужасно»: Standard order would be «Я ужасно люблю»; fronting the intensifier «ужасно» (terribly, awfully) throws all the weight onto the degree of her fondness, mimicking gushing speech. «Ужасно» here is colloquially positive — "awfully fond," not "horribly."
> «Что же…?» — coaxing question with «же»: «Что же вы не продолжаете?» uses «что» colloquially for "why," with «же» adding a cajoling insistence — "why ever don't you go on?" «Продолжаете» is imperfective, fitting the request to continue an ongoing activity.

Голос запел снова:  
The voice struck up again:
> Inceptive perfective «запел»: «Запел» again carries the inceptive prefix за- on «петь» (to sing): "struck up, burst into song." The perfective marks the fresh start of singing as a single bounded event, against the imperfective «петь» that would mean "to be singing."

Царская корона —
Была бы моя милая здорова.
Господи пом-и-илуй
Ее и меня!
Ее и меня!
Ее и меня!  
A royal crown were nothing—
If only my darling were healthy.
Lord, ha-a-ave mercy
On her and on me!
On her and on me!
On her and on me!
> Conditional-wish «была бы… здорова»: «Была бы… здорова» is the irrealis: past «была» plus «бы» plus the short adjective «здорова» (healthy) — "if only my dear were well / would that she be well." «Бы» fronts to lean on the verb at the line's head, and the short-form «здорова» predicates a state. The couplet contrasts a royal crown with the one thing wished for.

— В прошлый раз еще лучше выходило, — заметил женский голос. — Вы спели про корону: «Была бы моя милочка здорова».  
“Last time it came out even better,” the woman's voice remarked. “You sang it about the crown: ‘If only my sweetheart were healthy.’
> Suppletive comparative «лучше» + imperfective «выходило»: «Лучше» is the irregular (suppletive) comparative of «хороший» (good) — not formed by suffix but a separate root, "better." «Выходило» is imperfective ("it was coming out, turning out"), describing how the song used to sound — an ongoing quality, not a single result.
> «милочка» — "sweetheart, dearie" (diminutive): «Милочка» is «милая» (dear one) plus the affectionate diminutive -очк-, "dear little sweetheart." Marya prefers it to the plainer «милой» of today's version precisely because the diminutive feels «нежнее» (more tender) — the very point she makes next.

Этак нежнее выходило, вы, верно, сегодня позабыли.  
That way it came out more tender; you must have forgotten it today.”
> Comparative adverb «нежнее»: «Нежнее» is the comparative of «нежно/нежный» (tender), formed with the invariable predicative ending -ее: "more tenderly." «Этак» is a colloquial "that way, like that," and «выходило» again imperfective for the recurring effect.
> Perfective «позабыли» of a completed lapse: «Позабыли» is perfective ("you have forgotten," with за-/по- intensifying «забыть»), naming a completed loss of memory. The parenthetical «верно» here means "surely, no doubt" (an adverb of certainty), not "correctly."

— Стихи вздор-с, — отрезал Смердяков.  
“Verse is rubbish, ma'am,” Smerdyakov cut in.
> Curt verbless verdict + «-с»: «Стихи вздор-с» has no copula — present-tense Russian needs none — so the bare nominatives «стихи» (verse) and «вздор» (nonsense) snap together: "verse [is] rubbish." The deferential «-с» on the dismissive «вздор» captures Smerdyakov exactly: insolence wrapped in servile courtesy.
> «вздор» — rubbish, nonsense, twaddle: «Вздор» is dismissive "nonsense, rot, twaddle." Smerdyakov's verdict on poetry — and his pseudo-logical defence of it — is one of the novel's small windows into his sterile, contemptuous rationalism.

— Ах нет, я очень стишок люблю.  
“Oh no, I'm very fond of a little poem.”
> «стишок» — a little verse (diminutive): «Стишок» is «стих» (verse) with the diminutive -ок, "a little poem, a bit of verse" — fond and slightly belittling at once. Marya's choice of the cosy diminutive against Smerdyakov's flat «стих» marks her sentimental, undiscerning taste.

— Это чтобы стих-с, то это существенный вздор-с.  
“As for its being verse, ma'am, that's essentially rubbish, ma'am.
> Smerdyakov's mangled correlative syntax: «Это чтобы стих-с, то это существенный вздор-с» is deliberately garbled pseudo-learned speech: a stray «чтобы», a correlative «это… то это», doubled «-с». Dostoevsky builds Smerdyakov's character out of this strained, would-be-logical syntax that keeps tangling itself.
> «существенный» — "essential, in essence": «Существенный» (from «существо/сущность», essence) means "essential, substantial." Smerdyakov reaches for the learned-sounding word to upgrade his verdict from "rubbish" to "rubbish in its very essence" — bookish vocabulary deployed to sound clever.

Рассудите сами: кто же на свете в рифму говорит?  
Judge for yourself: who in the world talks in rhyme?
> Imperative «рассудите» + intensifier «сами»: «Рассудите» is the polite/plural imperative of perfective «рассудить» (to judge, weigh) — "judge for yourselves." «Сами» is the intensifying "yourselves," agreeing with the implied вы. The perfective fits a single act of judgment Smerdyakov invites her to make.
> «кто же» — rhetorical question with «же»: «Кто же… говорит?» is a rhetorical question: the interrogative «кто» plus «же» ("who on earth…?") expects the answer "no one." The imperfective «говорит» (speaks, habitually) frames it as a general truth about how people talk.

И если бы мы стали все в рифму говорить, хотя бы даже по приказанию начальства, то много ли бы мы насказали-с?  
And if we all took to talking in rhyme, even by order of the authorities, how much would we manage to say, ma'am?
> Full counterfactual conditional with «бы»… «бы»: A complete irrealis conditional: «если бы… стали говорить» (if we took to speaking) in the protasis, «много ли бы… насказали» in the apodosis, with «бы» repeated in both halves and the verbs in past form. It hypothesizes an unreal world to mock the very idea of speaking in rhyme.
> Interrogative «ли» inside the conditional: «Много ли» fronts the focused «много» (much) and follows it with the particle «ли» to form the question "would we say much?" — a literary alternative to mere intonation. The perfective «насказали» (with на-, "would manage to say a quantity of") caps the rhetorical jab.

Стихи не дело, Марья Кондратьевна.  
Verse is no business of mine, Marya Kondratyevna.
> Verbless negation: «стихи не дело»: Again no copula: «стихи не дело» = "verse [is] no business / not a serious thing." «Не» negates the predicate noun «дело» directly. The flat construction matches Smerdyakov's dismissive finality.

— Как вы во всем столь умны, как это вы во всем произошли? — ласкался всё более и более женский голос.  
“How is it you're so clever in everything? However did you come to be so accomplished in everything?” the woman's voice cooed, more and more caressing.
> Smerdyakov-tinged idiom «во всём произошли»: «Произойти» normally means "to happen" or "to descend/originate from"; «как вы во всём произошли» is a strained, non-standard usage — roughly "how did you come to turn out so accomplished in everything?" Marya reaches above her register and mangles the verb, a comic echo of Smerdyakov's own pretensions.
> Reflexive «ласкался» — the voice fawned: «Ласкаться» (-ся on «ласкать», to caress) is the reflexive/middle "to fawn, nestle up, speak caressingly." Predicated of the «голос» (voice) itself, it personifies the cooing tone. Verb-before-subject order foregrounds the wheedling manner.
> «столь» — bookish "so, to such a degree": «Столь» is the elevated, literary equivalent of «так» (so), "so/to such an extent." In Marya's mouth it is a reach for refinement — pairing high-flown «столь умны» with her garbled «произошли» captures her half-educated striving.

— Я бы не то еще мог-с, я бы и не то еще знал-с, если бы не жребий мой с самого моего сыздетства.  
“I could do much more than this, ma'am, I could know much more than this, ma'am, were it not for my lot in life from my very childhood.
> Conditional boast «я бы… мог… знал»: Two parallel conditionals — «я бы… мог», «я бы… знал» — with «бы» leaning on the fronted «я»: "I could do / know far more." «Не то ещё» is colloquial "and then some, much more than that." The irrealis sets his thwarted potential against the «жребий» (lot) that crushed it.
> «жребий» — one's lot / fate, and «сыздетства»: «Жребий» is literally a drawn lot, by extension one's allotted fate or destiny — a bookish, fatalistic word. «Сыздетства» is a folksy-colloquial "from childhood" (compare standard «с детства»); Smerdyakov mixes the elevated «жребий» with the homely «сыздетства», his register forever lurching.

Я бы на дуэли из пистолета того убил, который бы мне произнес, что я подлец, потому что без отца от Смердящей произошел, а они и в Москве это мне в глаза тыкали, отсюда благодаря Григорию Васильевичу переползло-с.  
I'd shoot dead in a duel the man who'd say to my face that I'm a scoundrel because I came into the world fatherless, from the Stinking woman; and back in Moscow they kept throwing it in my eyes, it crept over there thanks to Grigory Vasilyevich, ma'am.
> Correlative «того… который» with conditional «бы»: «Того… который бы… произнёс» pairs the demonstrative antecedent «того» (that man, accusative-genitive of the animate) with a relative «который» whose clause carries «бы» — "the man who would say." The conditional inside the relative makes the offender hypothetical: whoever might dare say it.
> Plural «они»: a genuine plural here: Here «они… тыкали» is a genuine plural — the people in Moscow who taunted him about his birth — not the deferential plural-for-one-person Smerdyakov uses elsewhere of Ivan. Note the same «они»/«ихнее» pattern recurs through Smerdyakov's lines. The imperfective «тыкали» conveys repeated jabbing.

Григорий Васильевич попрекает, что я против рождества бунтую: «Ты, дескать, ей ложесна разверз».  
Grigory Vasilyevich reproaches me for rebelling against my own birth: ‘You,’ says he, ‘you tore open her womb.’
> «дескать» — reported-speech particle: «Дескать» (and «де», «мол») flags that the speaker is quoting or paraphrasing someone else's words, often skeptically — "says he, so he claims." It lets Smerdyakov ventriloquize Grigory's reproach while keeping an ironic distance from it.
> Church-Slavonic «ложесна разверз»: «Ложесна» is an archaic Church-Slavonic word for the womb, and «разверз» the bookish perfective "opened, rent open" (compare «разверзнуть»). The phrase «разверзающий ложесна» echoes Scripture (Exodus 13:2, of the firstborn that "openeth the womb"). Grigory's solemn biblical idiom for Smerdyakov's violent birth lends his reproach a crushing, sacred weight.

Оно пусть ложесна, но я бы дозволил убить себя еще во чреве с тем, чтобы лишь на свет не происходить вовсе-с.  
Womb or no womb, I'd have let myself be killed in the very belly, only so as not to be brought into the world at all, ma'am.
> Conditional «бы» + purpose «с тем, чтобы»: «Я бы дозволил» is conditional ("I would have allowed"), and «с тем, чтобы… не происходить» is a purpose clause — the correlative «с тем» pointing to «чтобы» plus an infinitive: "with the aim of not coming into the world at all." The reflexive «себя» is the object of «убить».
> «во чреве» — Church-Slavonic "in the womb": «Чрево» is the elevated/Slavonic word for belly or womb (cf. «во чреве матери», in the mother's womb), and the form «во» (rather than «в») before the consonant cluster is itself Slavonic-archaic. Smerdyakov keeps slipping into this sacred register even to voice his blackest, anti-natal wish.

На базаре говорили, а ваша маменька тоже рассказывать мне пустилась по великой своей неделикатности, что ходила она с колтуном на голове, а росту была всего двух аршин с малыим.  
They talked of it in the marketplace, and your mama too took it into her head to tell me all about it, out of her great want of delicacy, that she went about with her hair all in a matted tangle, and that she stood no more than two arshins and a wee bit in height.
> «пуститься» + infinitive — set to doing: «Пуститься рассказывать» pairs perfective «пуститься» (to set off, take to) with the imperfective infinitive «рассказывать» (telling): "took it into her head to start telling." The phase verb «пуститься» governs the imperfective because one launches into an ongoing activity.
> «маменька» and «колтун»: «Маменька» is an affectionate-genteel diminutive of «мама» ("mama, mummy"), a touch of mock-tenderness toward Marya's mother. A «колтун» is matted, felted, vermin-tangled hair — a mark of squalor and neglect; Stinking Lizaveta wandered «с колтуном на голове». The cosy diminutive against the squalid «колтун» is pure Smerdyakov.

Для чего же с малыим, когда можно просто «с малым» сказать, как все люди произносят?  
Why ‘a wee bit,’ when one could simply say ‘a little,’ the way everyone else pronounces it?
> Dialect «малыим» vs standard «малым»: Smerdyakov sneers at the folk-dialect instrumental «малыим» (with an extra syllable) for the standard «малым» ("with a little"). The non-standard ending betrays peasant speech, and his contempt for it — "as all [proper] people pronounce it" — is the whole point: he despises the peasant tongue he sprang from.

Слезно выговорить захотелось, так ведь это мужицкая, так сказать, слеза-с, мужицкие самые чувства.  
She wanted to put it tearfully, but that, you see, is a peasant tear, so to speak, ma'am, the most peasant sort of feeling.
> Impersonal «захотелось» — the impulse came over her: «Захотелось» is the impersonal reflexive of «захотеть» — there is no nominative subject; the implied experiencer (she) is felt in the dative, and the desire "came over" her: "she felt like putting it tearfully." This dative-experiencer framing of inner impulse is everywhere in Dostoevsky.
> «мужицкий» — "peasant, boorish": «Мужик» is a (male) peasant, and «мужицкий» the adjective "peasant-, boorish, low-class." Smerdyakov uses it three times in scornful succession — «мужицкая слеза» (a peasant tear), «мужицкие чувства» (peasant feelings) — to disown the very class of his birth in favour of the «образованный человек» (educated man) he longs to be.

Может ли русский мужик против образованного человека чувство иметь?  
Can a Russian peasant have any feeling at all next to an educated man?
> Rhetorical question with «ли»: «Может ли… иметь?» fronts the verb «может» and follows it with the interrogative particle «ли» — "can a Russian peasant have…?" — a literary, rhetorical question expecting "no." «Ли» is more formal than mere question intonation and frequent in Dostoevsky's stylized speech.

По необразованности своей он никакого чувства не может иметь.  
In his lack of education he can have no feeling whatever.
> Negative concord + genitive of negation: «Никакого чувства не может иметь» stacks the ни-word «никакого» (no… whatever) with the verbal negation «не» in obligatory concord, and the negated object «чувства» stands in the genitive — "can have no feeling whatever." The genitive of negation plus «никакой» drives the absoluteness home.
> Causal «по» + dative, with reflexive «своей»: «По необразованности» uses «по» + dative to give a cause — "by reason of, owing to his lack of education." «Своей» is the reflexive possessive, his own. The abstract noun «необразованность» (un-educated-ness) is the negated mirror of the «образованный человек» Smerdyakov reveres.

Я с самого сыздетства, как услышу, бывало, «с малыим», так точно на стену бы бросился.  
From my very childhood, whenever I'd happen to hear that ‘a wee bit,’ I felt I could fairly throw myself at the wall.
> «бывало» + future-form for habitual past: «Бывало» ("it used to happen, time and again") with a perfective present/future form «услышу» builds the iterative past: "whenever I would happen to hear." This «бывало» + perfective construction is the classic Russian way to narrate a repeated past habit vividly.
> Conditional «бросился бы» of habitual reaction: «На стену бы бросился» is conditional (past «бросился» + «бы»), here expressing a recurring near-reaction — "I felt I could fairly throw myself at the wall." «Броситься» is reflexive-perfective (to hurl oneself); the «бы» renders the impulse as something that almost, repeatedly, happened.

Я всю Россию ненавижу, Марья Кондратьевна.  
I hate the whole of Russia, Marya Kondratyevna.
> Accusative object «всю Россию»: «Всю Россию» is the direct object of «ненавижу» in the accusative (feminine «Россию», with «всю» agreeing). The imperfective «ненавидеть» (to hate) names a standing state, not an event — a settled, total hatred, fronted before the verb for emphasis: "the whole of Russia I hate."

— Когда бы вы были военным юнкерочком али гусариком молоденьким, вы бы не так говорили, а саблю бы вынули и всю Россию стали бы защищать.  
“If you'd been a young cadet in the army, or a dashing little hussar, you wouldn't talk like that—you'd have drawn your saber and gone to defend the whole of Russia.”
> Counterfactual with archaic «когда бы»: «Когда бы вы были» is a bookish, slightly archaic equivalent of «если бы вы были» (if you had been) — «когда» here means "if." The whole period is irrealis, with «бы» recurring in each clause («не так говорили», «вынули», «стали бы защищать»), imagining the soldier Smerdyakov is not.
> Diminutives «юнкерочек», «гусарик» + folksy «али»: Marya coats the soldiery in cooing diminutives: «юнкерочек» (a dear little cadet, from «юнкер») and «гусарик» (a sweet little hussar, from «гусар») — the dashing officer reduced to a darling toy. «Али» is a folk-poetic variant of «или» (or). The whole line is sentimental, story-book militarism.

— Я не только не желаю быть военным гусариком, Марья Кондратьевна, но желаю, напротив, уничтожения всех солдат-с.  
“Not only do I not wish to be an army hussar, Marya Kondratyevna, but on the contrary, I wish for the abolition of all soldiers, ma'am.”
> Correlative «не только… но» framing: «Не только не желаю… но… желаю» is the "not only not X, but on the contrary Y" frame, the double negation «не только не» piling up to heighten the reversal. «Напротив» (on the contrary) hinges the two halves, swinging from refusing soldierhood to wishing soldiers abolished.
> Genitive object «уничтожения»: «Желать» (to wish/desire) governs the genitive: «желаю уничтожения» — "I wish for the abolition." The abstract noun «уничтожение» (annihilation, abolition) then takes its own genitive «всех солдат» (of all soldiers). Verbs of desire and seeking classically take the genitive of their object.

— А когда неприятель придет, кто же нас защищать будет?  
“And when the enemy comes, who's going to defend us?”
> Compound future «защищать будет» + «же»: «Защищать будет» is the imperfective compound future — future of «быть» plus imperfective infinitive — naming an ongoing future activity: "who will (be there to) defend us?" «Же» on the interrogative «кто» gives the anxious press, "who on earth, then?"
> «неприятель» — the (military) enemy: «Неприятель» is the somewhat formal/old-fashioned word for a military enemy or hostile force (distinct from a personal «враг»). It belongs to the patriotic-martial vocabulary of invasions and defence that the whole exchange — soldiers, Napoleon, the Fatherland — turns on.

— Да и не надо вовсе-с.  
“Why, there's no need of it at all, ma'am.
> Impersonal «не надо» — "no need": «Не надо» is an impersonal modal predicate ("there's no need, one mustn't"), taking no nominative subject; the thing not needed would stand in the genitive or be understood. «Да» opens with a dismissive "why," «вовсе» means "at all," and the «-с» tacks on the servile courtesy.

В двенадцатом году было на Россию великое нашествие императора Наполеона французского первого, отца нынешнему, и хорошо, кабы нас тогда покорили эти самые французы: умная нация покорила бы весьма глупую-с и присоединила к себе.  
In the year '12 there was the great invasion of Russia by the Emperor Napoleon the First of France, father of the present one, and it would have been a fine thing if those very Frenchmen had conquered us then: a clever nation would have subjugated a thoroughly stupid one, ma'am, and joined it to itself.
> Folk «кабы» + counterfactual chain: «Кабы» is a folk-colloquial fusion of «как бы / если бы» meaning "if only," introducing an unreal wish. The apodosis runs in the conditional: «покорила бы… присоединила (бы)» — "would have subjugated… and annexed." The whole is a counterfactual rewriting of 1812.
> Substantivized adjective «глупую» + comparison of nations: «Глупую» (the stupid one) stands alone as a substantivized adjective, accusative feminine agreeing with an understood «нацию». «Весьма» is the bookish "very, exceedingly." Smerdyakov frames the conquest as a clever nation rightfully absorbing a stupid one — his cold, anti-patriotic "logic."

Совсем даже были бы другие порядки-с.  
Things would have been ordered quite differently, ma'am.
> Conditional «были бы» — "things would have been": «Были бы… другие порядки» is the conditional/counterfactual: past «были» plus «бы» with the plural subject «порядки» — "there would have been a different order of things." «Совсем даже» piles on intensifiers, "even quite, altogether," in Smerdyakov's emphatic register.
> «порядки» — the established order, ways of things: In the plural, «порядки» means the prevailing arrangements, customs, social order — "the way things are run." Smerdyakov imagines a French conquest installing "quite different порядки": better-managed, more European, less Russian — his Westernizing fantasy in a single word.

— Да будто они там у себя так уж лучше наших?  
“As if they're really so much better off there than we are?
> Skeptical particles «да… будто… так уж»: This question bristles with particles: «да» ("come now"), «будто» ("as if, supposedly," casting doubt), and «так уж» ("really so, all that"). Together they make Marya's challenge incredulous — "as if they're really all that much better than ours?" The comparative «лучше» governs the genitive «наших» (than ours).

Я иного нашего щеголечка на трех молодых самых англичан не променяю, — нежно проговорила Марья Кондратьевна, должно быть, сопровождая в эту минуту слова свои самыми томными глазками.  
I wouldn't trade one of our own little dandies for three of the very youngest Englishmen,” Marya Kondratyevna said tenderly, accompanying her words at that moment, no doubt, with her most languishing glances.
> Genitive plural after «трёх» in a negated trade: «Трёх… англичан» shows the numeral «три» (here declined «трёх») governing the genitive — and «англичан» is a zero-ending genitive plural. The perfective future «не променяю» (I won't trade/exchange) names a single refusal. «Иного… щеголечка» (one of our dandies) is the thing not to be given up even for three Englishmen.
> Imperfective gerund «сопровождая» + instrumental: «Сопровождая» is the imperfective gerund "accompanying," simultaneous with the main verb. The means is in the instrumental — «глазками» (with little glances) — and «свои» is the reflexive possessive (her own words). The narrator's «должно быть» (no doubt) flags this as his amused conjecture.
> Diminutives «щеголёчек» and «глазки»: «Щеголёчек» is a double-diminutive of «щёголь» (dandy, fop) — "a dear little dandy." «Глазки» is the affectionate diminutive of «глаза» (eyes), and «томные» means "languishing, melting." The cluster of diminutives renders Marya's syrupy, coquettish self-presentation.

— Это как кто обожает-с.  
“That depends on whom one fancies, ma'am.”
> Headless relative «как кто обожает»: «Это как кто обожает» is an elliptical, colloquial construction — roughly "that depends on what/whom one fancies." «Кто» functions almost indefinitely here ("according to who likes what"), and «обожает» (adores, is mad about) is imperfective for a general disposition. Smerdyakov dodges the question with a worldly shrug, capped by «-с».

— А вы и сами точно иностранец, точно благородный самый иностранец, уж это я вам чрез стыд говорю.  
“But you yourself are just like a foreigner—just like a most genteel foreigner; there, I say it to you, for all my shame.”
> «точно» + nominative — "just like": «Точно» here is a comparative particle "just like, exactly like" (not "precisely" as an adverb), taking a bare nominative «иностранец» as its complement. Marya repeats it for swooning emphasis, escalating to «благородный самый иностранец» — "a most genteel foreigner."
> «чрез» — bookish "through" / «чрез стыд»: «Чрез» is the elevated, contracted form of «через» (through), a literary-archaic touch. «Чрез стыд» means "through/for all my shame" — Marya confesses her admiration despite blushing. The bookish «чрез» in her mouth is another reach for refinement.

— Если вы желаете знать, то по разврату и тамошние, и наши все похожи.  
“If you wish to know, then in point of debauchery they're all alike, theirs and ours.
> Conditional «если» with «желать» + infinitive: «Если вы желаете знать» is a real (not irrealis) conditional with «если» — "if you wish to know." «Желать» governs the bare imperfective infinitive «знать». The mannered «желаете» (rather than plain «хотите») is Smerdyakov's pretension to polished speech.
> Short adjective «похожи» + correlative «и… и»: «Похожи» is the short (predicative) plural of «похожий» (alike, similar), the only form possible as a predicate here. «По разврату» ("in respect of debauchery," «по» + dative) gives the dimension of likeness, and «и тамошние, и наши» ("both theirs and ours") is the inclusive correlative.
> «тамошний» — "of that place, over there": «Тамошний» (from «там», there) means "local to that place, those over there" — the counterpart of «здешний» (of here). Smerdyakov sets «тамошние» (the foreigners) against «наши» (our own) to level them: all rogues alike, only better-shod abroad.

Все шельмы-с, но с тем, что тамошний в лакированных сапогах ходит, а наш подлец в своей нищете смердит и ничего в этом дурного не находит.  
All rogues, ma'am, only with this difference: that the one over there walks about in patent-leather boots, while our scoundrel reeks in his poverty and finds nothing wrong with it.
> Contrastive «а» across the social divide: The crucial contrast hangs on «а»: «тамошний… ходит [в сапогах], а наш… смердит» — "the one over there walks about [in boots], while ours reeks." «А» marks the gentle-but-pointed opposition of two parallel types. Both verbs are imperfective, generalizing each as a habitual type.
> «смердит» — "reeks," the root of Smerdyakov: «Смердеть» is the harsh "to stink, reek," the same root that gives «Смердяков» and «Смердящая». Saying "our scoundrel reeks in his poverty," Smerdyakov half-consciously names his own surname-wound: he is the one who "stinks," and he projects the stench onto all of Russia.

Русский, народ надо пороть-с, как правильно говорил вчера Федор Павлович, хотя и сумасшедший он человек со всеми своими детьми-с.  
The Russian people need to be flogged, ma'am, as Fyodor Pavlovich rightly said yesterday, mad though he is, he and all his children, ma'am.
> Impersonal «надо» + infinitive + accusative object: «Надо пороть» is the impersonal necessity construction — «надо» (one must) plus the imperfective infinitive «пороть» (to flog), with no nominative subject. «Народ» is the accusative object of the flogging. «Русский народ надо пороть» — "the Russian people must be flogged" — frames a brutal generality as bare necessity.
> Concessive «хотя и» — "mad though he is": «Хотя и сумасшедший он человек» is a concessive clause with «хотя (и)» (although), here with the predicate fronted before the subject for vehemence — "mad though he is, the man." It grants Fyodor Pavlovich's madness while still endorsing his cruel dictum.

— Вы Ивана Федоровича, говорили сами, так уважаете.  
“But you said yourself that you have such respect for Ivan Fyodorovich.”
> Animate accusative «Ивана Фёдоровича»: «Ивана Фёдоровича» is the accusative of an animate masculine — and for animates the accusative borrows the genitive ending (-а on both the name and the patronymic), unlike inanimate nouns. The whole name+patronymic declines together as the object of «уважаете» (respect).

— А они про меня отнеслись, что я вонючий лакей.  
“And yet he spoke of me as a stinking lackey.
> Plural «они» for one man + «про» + accusative: «Они… отнеслись» again uses the deferential plural «они» for the single Ivan. «Про меня» is «про» + the accusative «меня» — "about me, concerning me." «Отнестись» (reflexive perfective) means "to express oneself about, regard" — here "he spoke of me [as]."
> «вонючий лакей» — "stinking lackey": «Вонючий» (stinking, from «вонять», to stink) and «лакей» (lackey, footman) together fling back at Smerdyakov both his servile station and his stench-laden name. Ivan's insult lands on the two wounds — class and birth — around which all of Smerdyakov's resentment is wound.

Они меня считают, что бунтовать могу; это они ошибаются-с.  
They reckon I'm capable of rebelling; there they're mistaken, ma'am.
> «считают, что…» + infinitive «бунтовать могу»: «Считают, что… могу» reports an opinion with the conjunction «что» (that): "they reckon that I can…" «Могу бунтовать» pairs «мочь» (to be able) with the imperfective infinitive «бунтовать» (to rebel, riot). The fronted «бунтовать» throws the stress onto the very capacity they (wrongly) impute to him.
> «бунтовать» — to rebel, rise up: «Бунтовать» (from «бунт», a revolt, mutiny, riot) means to rebel or rise against authority. Whether Smerdyakov is one who would «бунтовать» — against his birth, against Russia, against the Karamazov order — is a charged question; he insists "there they're mistaken," yet the whole novel turns on what he will dare.

Была бы в кармане моем такая сумма, и меня бы здесь давно не было.  
Had I such a sum in my pocket, I'd have been gone from here long ago.
> Conditionless counterfactual: «была бы… не было бы»: A conditional with no «если»: the bare «была бы… сумма» ("had there been such a sum") carries the "if" by itself, and the result «меня бы… не было» (I would not have been here) is counterfactual. Note the genitive of negation: the absent person stands in the genitive «меня» with «не было».

Дмитрий Федорович хуже всякого лакея и поведением, и умом, и нищетой своею-с, и ничего-то он не умеет делать, а, напротив, от всех почтен.  
Dmitri Fyodorovich is worse than any lackey, in his conduct, in his mind, and in his poverty too, ma'am, and there's nothing whatever he can do, yet on the contrary, everyone holds him in honor.
> Comparative «хуже» + instrumental of respect: «Хуже» is the suppletive comparative of «плохой» (worse), governing the genitive «всякого лакея» (than any lackey). The respects of comparison stand in the instrumental — «поведением, умом, нищетой» (in conduct, in mind, in poverty) — the instrumental of "in respect of which."
> Emphatic «-то» on the negative «ничего»: «Ничего-то… не умеет» attaches the emphatic clitic «-то» to the negated «ничего» (nothing at all), heightening the scorn — "there's nothing whatever he can do." The double negation «ничего… не» is obligatory concord, and «от всех почтён» (honoured by all) is the galling contrast set off by «напротив».

Я, положим, только бульонщик, но я при счастье могу в Москве кафе-ресторан открыть на Петровке.  
I, let's say, am only a broth-cook, but given the luck, I could open a café-restaurant in Moscow, on Petrovka.
> «положим» — concessive "let's say, granted": «Положим» is the perfective imperative of «положить» used as a parenthetical concession: "let's say, suppose, granted." Smerdyakov concedes his lowly trade («только бульонщик») before pivoting, with «но», to his boast of culinary skill.
> «бульонщик» — a broth-cook: A «бульонщик» (from «бульон», broth/bouillon — itself a French loan) is a cook who makes broths and soups, a humble kitchen specialist. Smerdyakov names his actual station with feigned modesty, only to claim that this very skill could set up a Moscow restaurant.

Потому что я готовлю специально, а ни один из них в Москве, кроме иностранцев, не может подать специально.  
Because I cook specialty dishes, and not one of them in Moscow, the foreigners aside, can serve a specialty dish.
> «ни один… не» — negative concord with "not a single": «Ни один из них… не может» is the emphatic "not a single one of them can," with «ни один» and the verbal «не» in obligatory concord. «Кроме иностранцев» (except foreigners) carves out the exception — once again the foreigner is the standard Russians fall short of.
> «специально» — "specialty (dishes)": Smerdyakov uses «специально» oddly, as if it meant "specialty cooking / specialty dishes" — "I cook specially," "serve a specialty." The slightly off, would-be-professional use of a foreign-flavoured word is part of his portrait: technical-sounding language stretched beyond his command.

Дмитрий Федорович голоштанник-с, а вызови он на дуэль самого первейшего графского сына, и тот с ним пойдет-с, а чем он лучше меня-с?  
Dmitri Fyodorovich is a ragged pauper, ma'am, yet let him challenge the very foremost count's son to a duel, and the man will go out with him, ma'am—and how is he any better than me, ma'am?
> Imperative «вызови» as a conditional protasis: «Вызови он… и тот пойдёт» uses a bare perfective imperative «вызови» (let him challenge / should he challenge) to mean "if he were to challenge" — the imperative form standing in for a conditional clause, a vivid colloquial idiom. The result «тот… пойдёт» is the perfective future "the man will go out [to fight]."
> Comparative «лучше» + «чем» / genitive: «Чем он лучше меня?» — "how is he any better than me?" — shows the comparative «лучше» with the genitive «меня» (than me); «чем» here is the interrogative "in what way." The line distills Smerdyakov's grievance: by what right does Dmitri rank above him?
> «голоштанник» — a ragged pauper: A coarse, contemptuous coinage from «голый» (bare) + «штаны» (trousers): literally "bare-trousered one," i.e. a penniless ragamuffin who can't keep his breeches whole. Smerdyakov flings it at the well-born Dmitri to underline the gap between his rank and his ruin.

Потому что он не в пример меня глупее.  
Because he's beyond all comparison stupider than I am.
> Comparative «глупее» + idiom «не в пример»: «Глупее» is the comparative of «глупый» (stupider). «Не в пример» is an idiom "incomparably, beyond all comparison" intensifying it, and the comparison's standard «меня» is in the genitive — "beyond all comparison stupider than I." The word order scatters across the colloquial flow.

Сколько денег просвистал без всякого употребления-с.  
Think how much money he's frittered away to no purpose at all, ma'am.
> «сколько» + genitive «денег» + perfective «просвистал»: «Сколько денег» — the quantifier «сколько» (how much) governs the genitive «денег» (of money). «Просвистал» is a slangy perfective meaning "squandered, blew, frittered away" (literally "whistled away"), the perfective marking the money as wholly, completely gone.
> «просвистать деньги» — to blow money for nothing: «Просвистать» (lit. "to whistle away") is vivid slang for blowing money pointlessly. «Без всякого употребления» — "without any use at all," the «ни/всякий» reinforcing the waste — caps the contempt: Dmitri threw his fortune away to no purpose, while Smerdyakov, frugal and able, has none.

— На дуэли очень, я думаю, хорошо, — заметила вдруг Марья Кондратьевна.  
“A duel must be very fine, I think,” Marya Kondratyevna suddenly remarked.
> Impersonal predicate «хорошо»: «На дуэли… хорошо» is an impersonal evaluative: the invariable predicate «хорошо» (it is fine/good) with the locative «на дуэли» (at a duel) and no nominative subject — "a duel must be a fine thing." Marya's dreamy aestheticizing of the duel sets up Smerdyakov's deflating reply.

— Чем же это-с?  
“How so, ma'am?”
> Instrumental «чем» + particle «же»: «Чем» is the instrumental of «что» (what), here "in what way, how so?" sharpened by «же». The whole curt question — "how so, then?" — plus the servile «-с» is pure Smerdyakov: a needling challenge dressed in deference.

— Страшно так и храбро, особенно коли молодые офицерики с пистолетами в руках один против другого палят за которую-нибудь.  
“So frightening and so brave, especially when young officers, pistols in hand, blaze away at one another over some lady or other.
> Folk «коли» + imperfective «палят»: «Коли» is a folk-colloquial "if/when" (for «если/когда»), opening the vivid scene. «Палят» is imperfective (to blaze away, keep firing), painting the duel as an ongoing, picturesque spectacle rather than a single shot. «За которую-нибудь» — "over some lady or other" — uses «-нибудь» for a non-specific any-one.
> Diminutive «офицерик» + indefinite «которую-нибудь»: «Офицерик» is the diminutive of «офицер» (officer) — "a dashing little officer," the toy-soldier of Marya's romantic fancy. «Которую-нибудь» (some lady or other) uses the non-specific «-нибудь», leaving the woman they fight over pointedly vague — for Marya it is the picture, not the cause, that thrills.

Просто картинка.  
A perfect picture.
> «картинка» — "a perfect picture": «Картинка» is the diminutive of «картина» (picture), used idiomatically for something charmingly pretty, "a perfect picture, a lovely sight." «Просто» here means "simply, just" — a one-phrase verbless exclamation of Marya's swooning aestheticism.

Ах, кабы девиц пускали смотреть, я ужасно как хотела бы посмотреть.  
Ah, if only they let girls in to watch, I'd want dreadfully to see it.”
> Folk «кабы» counterfactual + conditional wish: «Кабы… пускали… я… хотела бы» is a counterfactual: folk «кабы» (if only) with imperfective «пускали» (they let), and the wish «хотела бы» (I would want) in the conditional. «Девиц» is the zero-ending genitive plural of «девица» — the negated/quantified object of "let in."
> Intensifier «ужасно как» + perfective infinitive: «Ужасно как» piles two intensifiers — "awfully how much" — onto the conditional «хотела бы посмотреть». «Посмотреть» is perfective (to have a look, watch), fitting the single hoped-for act of watching. Marya's gushing register peaks here.

— Хорошо коли сам наводит, а коли ему самому в самое рыло наводят, так оно тогда самое глупое чувство-с.  
“It's fine when you're the one taking aim, but when they're aiming straight into your own mug, then it's the stupidest feeling there is, ma'am.
> Folk «коли… а коли» + impersonal plural: Two «коли» (if/when) clauses are balanced by contrastive «а»: "when you yourself aim, but when they aim at you." The second «наводят» is an agentless third-person plural ("they aim" = "one is aimed at"). «Хорошо… самое глупое чувство» are impersonal evaluations with no subject.
> «рыло» — "snout, mug" (coarse): «Рыло» is properly an animal's snout (of a pig), and applied to a person it is crude and insulting — "mug, ugly face." Smerdyakov's deliberately gross «в самое рыло наводят» (aiming right into your mug) yanks Marya's romantic duel-picture down into the dirt.

Убежите с места, Марья Кондратьевна.  
You'd run from the spot, Marya Kondratyevna.”
> Perfective future «убежите» as confident prediction: «Убежите» is the perfective (simple) future of «убежать» (to run away) — "you'll run off," a single completed flight. With no "if," it functions as a flat, taunting prediction. «С места» (from the spot) names what she'd flee. The form is a prefixed motion verb (у- + бежать).

— Неужто вы побежали бы?  
“You don't mean you'd really run?”
> Particle «неужто» + conditional «побежали бы»: «Неужто» (a folksy variant of «неужели») is an incredulous question particle, "surely you don't mean…?, really?" «Побежали бы» is conditional (would run). Together: "you don't mean you'd actually run?" — Marya's coy disbelief.

Но Смердяков не удостоил ответить.  
But Smerdyakov did not deign to answer.
> «удостоить» + infinitive — "did not deign": «Удостоить» (to deem worthy, vouchsafe) with the perfective infinitive «ответить» yields "did not deign to answer." The lofty, formal verb, negated, captures Smerdyakov's superior disdain — he treats the question as beneath a reply.

После минутного молчания раздался опять аккорд и фистула залилась последним куплетом:  
After a moment's silence, the chord sounded once more and the falsetto poured itself out in a last verse:
> Reflexive «раздался» / «залилась» — sounds arising of themselves: Both verbs are reflexive middles: «раздаться» (-ся, to ring out, resound) and «залиться» (-ся, to burst into / pour out sound). The chord and the falsetto "ring out" and "pour themselves" with no agent. Verb-before-subject order foregrounds the renewed music.
> «залиться» — to pour out (in song): «Залиться» (песней, слезами, смехом) means to break into a flood of song, tears, or laughter — to pour oneself out. «Фистула залилась последним куплетом» — the falsetto "poured itself out" in a final verse, a faintly mocking image of gushing, overwrought singing.

Сколько ни стараться
Стану удаляться,
Жизнью наслажда-а-аться
И в столице жить!
Не буду тужить.
Совсем не буду тужить,
Совсем даже не намерен тужить!  
However hard I try,
Away I'll take myself,
Reveling in li-i-ife
And living in the capital!
I will not grieve.
I won't grieve at all,
I haven't the least intention of grieving!
> Concessive «сколько ни» — "however much": «Сколько ни стараться» uses «ни» (not «не») in its concessive role: «сколько ни…» = "however much one tries." Here «ни» does not negate but yields "no matter how much." This «(как/сколько/что) ни» pattern is the standard "however / whatever" concessive.
> Two futures: «стану/буду» + imperfective infinitive: «Стану удаляться» and «не буду тужить» are both imperfective futures (with «стать» and «быть» as auxiliaries plus imperfective infinitives), naming ongoing future states — withdrawing, not grieving. «Совсем даже не намерен» (I've not the least intention) caps the song's breezy resolve.
> «тужить» — to grieve, pine; «столица» — the capital: «Тужить» is a folk-poetic verb "to grieve, fret, pine" (cf. «не тужи» — don't fret), at home in songs and proverbs. «Столица» is the capital — Petersburg or Moscow — the song's emblem of the good life. The romance's daydream of "living in the capital" rhymes with Smerdyakov's own Moscow-restaurant fantasy.

Тут случилась неожиданность: Алеша вдруг чихнул; на скамейке мигом притихли.  
Here something unexpected happened: Alyosha suddenly sneezed; on the bench they fell silent in an instant.
> Three perfectives snap the scene: A rapid chain of perfectives moves the turn: «случилась» (happened), «чихнул» (sneezed), «притихли» (fell silent). Each is a single bounded event; together they spring the trap — the sneeze, and the instant hush on the bench. «Мигом» (in a flash) underlines the suddenness.

Алеша встал и пошел в их сторону.  
Alyosha stood up and walked in their direction.
> Perfective «пошёл» — inceptive of motion: «Встал» (stood up) and «пошёл» (set off) are paired perfectives. «Пойти» is the inceptive perfective of the unidirectional motion verb «идти» — "to set off walking" in one direction (here, toward them). It marks the start of a single trajectory, the natural choice for a decisive move.

Это был действительно Смердяков, разодетый, напомаженный и чуть ли не завитой, в лакированных ботинках.  
It was indeed Smerdyakov, all dressed up, pomaded and very nearly curled, in patent-leather shoes.
> Past passive participles as appearance-modifiers: «Разодетый» (all dressed up), «напомаженный» (pomaded), «завитой» (curled) are past passive participles from perfective verbs, here used adjectivally to describe Smerdyakov's groomed state — each names something done to him. «Чуть ли не завитой» means "very nearly curled," the «чуть ли не» hedging.

Гитара лежала на скамейке.  
The guitar lay on the bench.

Дама же была Марья Кондратьевна, хозяйкина дочка; платье на ней было светло-голубое, с двухаршинным хвостом; девушка была еще молоденькая и недурная бы собой, но с очень уж круглым лицом и со страшными веснушками.  
The lady was Marya Kondratyevna, the landlady's daughter; the dress she wore was a pale blue one, with a train two arshins long; the girl was still quite young and would not have been bad-looking, but for her too round a face and her frightful freckles.
> Conditional «бы» softening a description: «Недурная бы собой» tucks the particle «бы» into the appraisal — "would not have been bad-looking" — making it conditional on the qualifications that follow («но с… круглым лицом… веснушками»). «Недурна(я) собой» is the set phrase "not bad-looking, rather pretty" (literally "not bad in herself").
> «хвост» (train) and «веснушки» (freckles): «Хвост» literally means "tail," used colloquially for the train of a dress; «двухаршинный» ("two-arshin," ~1.4 m) measures it in the old units. «Веснушки» are freckles. The grand Moscow train against the round, freckled provincial face is the narrator's deflating, affectionate joke at Marya's pretension.
> «молоденькая» — "quite young" (diminutive): «Молоденькая» is «молодая» (young) with the diminutive-endearing suffix -еньк-, softening to "quite young, ever so young." The narrator's diminutive lends a touch of tenderness to the otherwise comic portrait of the freckled landlady's daughter.

— Брат Дмитрий скоро воротится? — сказал Алеша как можно спокойнее.  
“Will my brother Dmitri be back soon?” said Alyosha as calmly as he could.
> Perfective future «воротится» — a single return: «Воротится» is the perfective future of the reflexive «воротиться» (to return) — "will he be back?", a single completed return. «Воротиться» is an old/folksy synonym of «вернуться»; both are -ся middles of motion-back. «Как можно спокойнее» means "as calmly as possible."

Смердяков медленно приподнялся со скамейки; приподнялась и Марья Кондратьевна.  
Smerdyakov rose slowly from the bench; Marya Kondratyevna rose as well.
> Reflexive «приподняться» + echoing word order: «Приподняться» (-ся, to rise a little, half-rise; при- softening «подняться») is an intransitive middle — he raises himself. The second clause inverts to verb-first, «приподнялась и Марья Кондратьевна», so the repeated verb leads and the new subject lands last, mirroring her copying his movement.

— Почему ж бы я мог быть известен про Дмитрия Федоровича; другое дело, кабы я при них сторожем состоял? — тихо, раздельно и пренебрежительно ответил Смердяков.  
“How should I be informed about Dmitri Fyodorovich? It'd be another matter if I were set to keep watch over him,” Smerdyakov answered, quietly, distinctly, and with disdain.
> Conditional «бы» in a rhetorical retort: «Почему ж бы я мог быть известен» folds «же» and «бы» into a haughty rhetorical question — "why ever should I be informed?" The conditional «мог бы» distances him from any obligation to know. «Известен» is a short-form adjective (here ~"informed, in the know"), predicative only.
> Folk «кабы» + instrumental predicate «сторожем»: «Кабы я… сторожем состоял» is a counterfactual with folk «кабы» (if only/were I). The predicate noun «сторожем» (as a watchman) stands in the instrumental after «состоять» (to serve as), the standard predicate-instrumental for a role one fills — "if I were [serving as] his keeper."

— Да я просто спросил, не знаете ли? — объяснил Алеша.  
“But I simply asked whether you might not know,” Alyosha explained.
> Embedded question with «ли» — "whether": «Я просто спросил, не знаете ли» uses the particle «ли» to form a reported/indirect question — "I simply asked whether you might not know." The negated «не знаете ли» is a polite, tentative "you don't happen to know, do you?" — Alyosha softening his probe.

— Ничего я про ихнее пребывание не знаю, да и знать не желаю-с.  
“I know nothing of his whereabouts, and don't wish to know either, ma'am.”
> Negative concord + non-standard «ихнее»: «Ничего… не знаю» is double-negative concord ("I know nothing"). «Ихнее» is the non-standard, colloquial possessive for «их» (their/his) — a marked, sub-standard form; Smerdyakov uses the deferential plural «ихнее пребывание» (his whereabouts) of Dmitri. The non-standard ending quietly betrays his class even as he postures.
> «да и… не желаю» — "and don't even wish to": «Да и знать не желаю» tacks on a dismissive coordinate clause with «да и» ("and besides, and indeed") — "and I don't even wish to know." The fronted infinitive «знать» before its governing «не желаю» throws the stress onto the very thing he refuses.

— А брат мне именно говорил, что вы-то и даете ему знать обо всем, что в доме делается, и обещались дать знать, когда придет Аграфена Александровна.  
“But my brother told me explicitly that it's you who keep him informed of everything that goes on in the house, and that you promised to let him know when Agrafena Alexandrovna comes.”
> Emphatic «-то» + «и»: "it's you who…": «Вы-то и даёте» fuses the topic-emphasizing clitic «-то» on «вы» with the focusing «и» — "it's precisely you who keep him informed." «Давать знать» is the set phrase "to let know, inform." The imperfective «даёте» marks it as an ongoing arrangement.
> Reflexive «обещались» + temporal «когда придёт»: «Обещались» is the reflexive «обещаться» (to promise), here with the deferential plural «-ись». «Когда придёт Аграфена Александровна» uses the perfective future «придёт» (will come) in a temporal clause — Russian uses the future, not a present, for a future "when"-event.

Смердяков медленно и невозмутимо вскинул на него глазами.  
Smerdyakov slowly and imperturbably raised his eyes to him.
> Instrumental «глазами» with «вскинуть»: «Вскинуть глазами» (lit. "to fling up with the eyes") takes the instrumental «глазами» as the means/manner of the look — to raise one's eyes sharply. The perfective «вскинул» captures the single, abrupt lift of the gaze; «невозмутимо» (imperturbably) colours the manner.

— А вы как изволили на сей раз пройти, так как ворота здешние уж час как на щеколду затворены? — спросил он, пристально смотря на Алешу.  
“And how did you see fit to get in this time, seeing that the gate here has been bolted shut for an hour now?” he asked, gazing intently at Alyosha.
> «изволить» + infinitive — mock-deferential idiom: «Изволить» (to deign, be so good as to) plus the perfective infinitive «пройти» (to get through/in) is an archaic, ultra-polite formula — "how did you see fit to come in?" In Smerdyakov's mouth the courtly «изволили» drips with veiled insolence, mock-deference masking a pointed challenge.
> Short-form passive participle «затворены»: «Затворены» is the short (predicative) form of the past passive participle «затворённый» (closed, shut), agreeing in plural with «ворота» (gate) — "the gate has been bolted." This short-form participle + implied «быть» is the standard resultative passive: it states the gate's resulting shut state.
> «щеколда» — a latch/bolt: A «щеколда» is a door- or gate-latch or bolt. «На щеколду затворены» means "shut on the latch, bolted." Smerdyakov's precise note that the gate has been bolted "for an hour now" is a quiet trap — how, then, did Alyosha get in? — revealing his watchful, suspicious cast of mind.

— А я прошел с переулка через забор прямо в беседку.  
“I came in from the lane, over the fence, straight into the summer-house.
> Prepositions of route: «с» + genitive, «через» + accusative: The path is built from governed prepositions: «с переулка» (from the lane, «с» + genitive of source), «через забор» (over the fence, «через» + accusative), «в беседку» (into the summer-house, «в» + accusative of motion). Each preposition fixes its case, and together they trace the trajectory.
> «переулок» — a lane / side-street: A «переулок» is a small side-street, alley, or lane branching off a main road. Alyosha's coming "from the переулок over the fence" places his stealthy entry at the back, away from the bolted gate — the very point Smerdyakov was probing.

Вы, надеюсь, извините меня в этом, — обратился он к Марье Кондратьевне, — мне надо было захватить скорее брата.  
I hope you'll forgive me for that,” he said, turning to Marya Kondratyevna; “I had to catch my brother as quickly as I could.”
> Imperative «извините» + accusative object: «Извините» is the polite/plural imperative of perfective «извинить» (to excuse), with «меня» as its accusative object — "forgive me." «В этом» (in this, «в» + prepositional) specifies what for. The perfective imperative asks for a single, complete act of pardon.
> Past impersonal necessity «мне надо было»: «Мне надо было захватить» is the dative-subject necessity construction in the past: experiencer «мне» in the dative, «надо» (must/need), the past carried by neuter «было», plus the perfective infinitive «захватить» (to catch, seize) — "I had to catch [him]." No nominative subject appears.

— Ах, можем ли мы на вас обижаться, — протянула Марья Кондратьевна, польщенная извинением Алеши, — так как и Дмитрий Федорович часто этим манером в беседку ходят, мы и не знаем, а он уж в беседке сидит.  
“Ah, how could we ever take offense at you,” drawled Marya Kondratyevna, flattered by Alyosha's apology, “since Dmitri Fyodorovich often comes to the summer-house this same way; we don't even know it, and he's already sitting there.”
> Rhetorical «можем ли» + imperfective «обижаться»: «Можем ли мы… обижаться?» fronts «можем» with «ли» for a rhetorical question expecting "of course not" — "how could we ever take offence?" «Обижаться (на кого-то)» is the reflexive "to take offence at," governing «на вас» (at you, «на» + accusative). The imperfective fits a state of being offended.
> Deferential plural «ходят» for one person: «Дмитрий Фёдорович… ходят» uses the plural verb «ходят» (multidirectional, habitual "comes/goes") of a single man — the servants' respectful plural, the same usage seen with «они/ихнее». Marya then slips back to the singular «сидит» (he's sitting), the plural-of-respect wavering in her excited speech.
> Past passive participle «польщённая» + instrumental: «Польщённая» is the past passive participle of «польстить» (to flatter), feminine, agreeing with Marya — "flattered." Its cause stands in the instrumental: «извинением Алёши» (by Alyosha's apology), the instrumental marking the agent/means of the flattering.

— Я его теперь очень ищу, я очень бы желал его видеть или от вас узнать, где он теперь находится.  
“I'm searching very hard for him now; I'd very much like to see him, or to learn from you where he is at present.
> Conditional «бы желал» softening a request: «Очень бы желал» is the conditional of «желать» (would very much like), the «бы» softening the wish into a polite, tentative request — "I'd very much like to." It governs two perfective infinitives «видеть» (here ~"see/meet") and «узнать» (to find out), the desired single outcomes.

Поверьте, что по очень важному для него же самого делу.  
Believe me, it's on a matter of great importance to himself.”
> Imperative «поверьте» + «что»-clause: «Поверьте» is the polite imperative of perfective «поверить» (to believe), governing a «что»-clause (which the sentence leaves elliptical): "believe me, [that] it's on a matter of great importance." «Для него же самого» — «же самого» intensifies "to himself, his very own."

— Они нам не сказываются, — пролепетала Maрья Кондратьевна.  
“He doesn't tell us his comings and goings,” Marya Kondratyevna faltered.
> Deferential plural «они» + reflexive «сказываются»: «Они… не сказываются» again uses the respectful plural «они» of one man (Dmitri). «Сказываться» (-ся) here means "to give notice of oneself, announce one's movements" — "he doesn't tell us his comings and goings." «Нам» is the dative of the people not told.
> «пролепетать» — to falter, babble shyly: «Пролепетать» (perfective of «лепетать», to babble, prattle as a child does) means to murmur or falter out something timidly. The narrator's choice paints Marya's reply as flustered and childlike, the perfective marking the single uttered phrase.

— Хотя бы я и по знакомству сюда приходил, — начал вновь Смердяков, — но они и здесь меня бесчеловечно стеснили беспрестанным спросом про барина: что, дескать, да как у них, кто приходит и кто таков уходит, и не могу ли я что иное им сообщить?  
“Even though I'd come here as an acquaintance,” Smerdyakov began again, “they've worried me beyond all bearing here too, with their endless questions about the master: what's this, says he, and how are things with them, who comes and who goes, and can't I tell them something more?
> Concessive «хотя бы… и» — "even though": «Хотя бы я и… приходил» is a concessive "even though I came / granted I came," the «бы» and «и» reinforcing the concession. «По знакомству» (по + dative) means "as an acquaintance, through acquaintance." Imperfective «приходил» frames it as repeated visiting.
> Instrumental «спросом» + reported «дескать»: «Стеснили… спросом» — they harried him "with questioning" (instrumental «спросом», the means). The «дескать» again flags reported speech, and «что… да как» ("what's this and how's that") mimics their pestering questions. «Бесчеловечно» (inhumanly) and «беспрестанным» (incessant) pile on the put-upon hyperbole.
> «барин» — the master, the gentleman: «Барин» is the master of the house, the gentleman-employer (here Fyodor Pavlovich), the word of a servant for the man he serves. It carries the whole weight of the master-servant world; Smerdyakov, the cook, calls Karamazov «барин» even as he plots within that household.

Два раза грозили мне даже смертью.  
Twice they even threatened me with death.
> «грозить» + dative + instrumental: «Грозить» (to threaten) takes the person threatened in the dative («мне», me) and the thing threatened with in the instrumental («смертью», with death) — a double-case government typical of this verb. «Два раза» (twice) with imperfective «грозили» counts the repeated threats.

— Как это смертью? — удивился Алеша.  
“With death, how do you mean?” Alyosha said in surprise.
> Instrumental «смертью» echoed in a question: Alyosha echoes the instrumental «смертью» (with death) from the previous line in his startled "with death, how do you mean?" «Как это…?» is the idiomatic "how do you mean…?, what do you mean by…?" The instrumental persists because it still answers "threatened with what?"

— А для них разве это что составляет-с, по ихнему характеру, который сами вчера изволили наблюдать-с.  
“And would that be anything to them, ma'am, given their character, which you yourself saw fit to observe yesterday, ma'am.
> Particle «разве» — incredulous question: «Разве» opens a question expressing doubt or surprise — "as if it would, would it really…?" «Это что составляет» ("does that amount to anything") with the deferential «-с» asks rhetorically whether such a threat means anything to men of "their character." «Для них» is the dative of the ones to whom it would matter.
> Relative «который» + mock-deferential «изволили»: «Который… изволили наблюдать» is a relative clause on «характер»: «который» (which, masc. acc.) is the object of «наблюдать» (to observe). The honorific «изволили» (you deigned/saw fit) plus «сами» keeps up Smerdyakov's oily courtesy toward Alyosha while reminding him he witnessed it himself.

Если, говорят, Аграфену Александровну пропущу и она здесь переночует, — не быть тебе первому живу.  
If, they say, I let Agrafena Alexandrovna by and she spends the night here—you'll be the first not to live to tell of it.
> Perfective future «пропущу» + dative-of-fate «тебе»: «Если… пропущу» uses the perfective future «пропущу» (I [shall] let by) in a real conditional. The threat «не быть тебе… живу» is an archaic infinitive-of-fate construction: «быть» + dative «тебе» = "you are not to be," i.e. "you won't live" — a doom pronounced over the dative person.
> Short-form «жив» in a folk-threat: «Не быть тебе первому живу» is a folk-flavoured malediction — roughly "you'll be the first not to survive it." «Живу» is the short (predicative) form of «живой» (alive), in the dative to agree with «тебе». The whole phrase is a set, menacing idiom of the «барин»'s violent temper.

Боюсь я их очень-с, и кабы не боялся еще пуще того, то заявить бы должен на них городскому начальству.  
I'm very much afraid of them, ma'am, and if I weren't afraid of something still worse, I ought to report them to the town authorities.
> Folk «кабы» counterfactual + conditional duty: «Кабы не боялся… то… бы должен» is a counterfactual: folk «кабы» (if [I] weren't) plus the apodosis «заявить бы должен» (I ought to report). «Пуще» is the archaic-folk comparative "more, worse" (for «больше/сильнее»). The «бы» renders the obligation contrary to fact — fear stops him.
> Reflexive-only «бояться» + genitive object: «Бояться» (to fear) exists only in the -ся form and governs its object in the genitive — «боюсь… их» (I fear them). It is a classic verb that takes a genitive complement. The deferential plural «их» again stands for the single «барин».

Даже бог знает что произвести могут-с.  
God only knows what they might do, ma'am.”
> Idiom «бог знает что» as object + «могут произвести»: «Бог знает что» ("God knows what") functions as a single indefinite object phrase — "goodness knows what." «Могут произвести» pairs «мочь» with the perfective infinitive «произвести» (to bring about, perpetrate). The deferential plural «могут» keeps the respectful plural for the master.

— Намедни сказали им: «В ступе тебя истолку», — прибавила Марья Кондратьевна.  
“The other day they said to him: ‘I'll grind you to a pulp in a mortar,’” Marya Kondratyevna added.
> Deferential plural «сказали им» + perfective future «истолку»: «Сказали им» again refers to the master in the deferential plural «им» (to him). The quoted threat «истолку» is the perfective future of «истолочь» (to pound/grind to a pulp) — a single, total crushing. The whole line reports the master's brutal speech.
> «в ступе истолочь» — "grind you to a pulp": A «ступа» is a mortar (for pounding grain with a pestle). «В ступе тебя истолку» — "I'll pound you to a pulp in a mortar" — is a grotesque folk-threat of total annihilation, the kind of lurid violence the elder Karamazov hurls about. (A ступа is also the witch Baba Yaga's vehicle in folktale, adding a darkly fairy-tale menace.)

— Ну если в ступе, то это только, может быть, разговор… — заметил Алеша. — Если б я его мог сейчас встретить, я бы мог ему что-нибудь и об этом сказать…  
“Well, if it's a mortar, then that's perhaps only talk…” Alyosha remarked. “If I could meet him right now, I might say something to him about this very thing…”
> Counterfactual with «если б… бы»: Alyosha's closing line is a full counterfactual: «если б… мог встретить» (if I could meet) in the protasis and «я бы мог… сказать» (I could say) in the apodosis, «бы» in both. Both verbs are perfective infinitives («встретить», «сказать») — a single hoped-for meeting and a single thing said.
> Indefinite «что-нибудь» — "something or other": «Что-нибудь» (something, anything) uses the non-specific particle «-нибудь»: Alyosha has no particular words in mind, just "something" he might say. Contrast «что-то», which would imply a definite if unnamed thing. The vagueness mirrors his earlier inability to define what he even wants to tell his brother.

— Вот что единственно могу сообщить, — как бы надумался вдруг Смердяков. — Бываю я здесь по всегдашнему соседскому знакомству, и как же бы я не ходил-с?  
"This is the one thing I can tell you," said Smerdyakov, as if he had suddenly made up his mind. "I come here through the long-standing neighborly acquaintance, and how could I not come, sir?
> Fronted neuter «что» as object: «Вот что» literally fronts the relative-interrogative «что» (neuter, accusative) as the thing he can report: 'here is what I can tell'. The bookish placement of the adverb «единственно» ('the only thing') before the verb gives the line its careful, hedging weight.
> The deferential «-с» (slovoyers): The clitic «-с» tacked onto «знакомству-с», «ходил-с», and throughout Smerdyakov's speech is the «словоер» — a contraction of «сударь» ('sir'). It signals servile deference to a social superior, and Dostoevsky loads Smerdyakov's mouth with it to mark his lackey's cunning obsequiousness.
> Conditional «бы» with rhetorical «же»: The past-tense «ходил» plus the particle «бы» builds the irrealis ('how could I not be coming'), while «же» adds the insistent, appealing 'why on earth'. The whole is a rhetorical question expecting agreement, doubly negated by «не».

С другой стороны, Иван Федорович чем свет сегодня послали меня к ним на квартиру в ихнюю Озерную улицу, без письма-с, с тем чтобы Дмитрий Федорович на словах непременно пришли в здешний трактир-с на площади, чтобы вместе обедать.  
On the other hand, Ivan Fyodorovich sent me at first light today to the gentleman's lodgings, to his place on Ozyornaya Street, without a letter, sir, with this errand: that Dmitri Fyodorovich was without fail to come, by word of mouth, to the tavern here on the square, sir, so the two of them might dine together.
> Servile honorific plural: «послали» is plural ('they sent'), though Ivan is one man. Servants used the plural verb for a master out of deference, the same impulse behind «-с». Note it again in «пришли» and «приходили» below — a grammatical mark of social rank, not number.
> «чем свет» — at first light: A fixed idiom meaning 'at daybreak, before dawn' (literally 'than-it-is-light', i.e. earlier than the light). Folksy and slightly archaic, it colors the servant's narration.
> Non-standard «ихний»: «ихний» ('their') is a colloquial, sub-standard possessive that educated Russian avoids in favor of the invariable «их». Dostoevsky uses it to fix Smerdyakov's half-educated, lower-class register.
> Purpose clause with «чтобы»: «с тем, чтобы…» introduces a purpose/instruction clause, and «чтобы» obligatorily takes the past-form verb «пришли» as its irrealis — a willed, not yet realized outcome ('so that he should come'). The repeated «чтобы… чтобы вместе обедать» chains two such clauses.

Я пошел-с, но Дмитрия Федоровича я на квартире ихней не застал-с, а было уж восемь часов.  
So I went, sir, but I did not find Dmitri Fyodorovich at his lodgings, sir, though it was already eight o'clock.
> Genitive of negation: Under the negated «не застал» ('did not find'), the animate object «Дмитрия Федоровича» stands in the genitive — though here, because Dmitri is animate masculine, the genitive and accusative forms coincide anyway. The choice is reinforced by the negation.
> Numeral + genitive plural: «восемь часов» — five and above govern the genitive plural, hence «часов». The impersonal past «было» ('it was [eight o'clock]') has no subject and stays neuter.

«Был, говорят, да весь вышел» — этими самыми словами их хозяева сообщили.  
"He was here, they say, but he's gone for good" — those were the very words his landlords gave me.
> «был, да весь вышел» — proverbial: A folk catchphrase: 'he was [here], but he's all run out' — said of something or someone wholly gone, as a barrel runs dry. The landlords answer Smerdyakov in a stock saying rather than plain prose; «да» here is the colloquial 'but'.
> Instrumental of means + emphatic «самый»: «этими самыми словами» is instrumental — the words are the means by which they reported ('reported in these very words'). «самый» reinforces the demonstrative ('these very'), and the object is fronted before its subject «хозяева» for emphasis.

Тут точно у них заговор какой-с, обоюдный-с.  
There is plainly some arrangement between them, sir, a mutual one, sir.
> Indefinite «какой-то» trimmed to «какой»: «заговор какой» ('some sort of arrangement / plot') uses «какой» postposed as a vague indefinite, the «-то» dropped in casual speech. The word order — noun before its modifier — is itself colloquial and tentative.
> «обоюдный» — mutual: A somewhat bookish adjective meaning 'mutual, reciprocal, two-sided'. Coming after the slangy «заговор какой-с», it shows Smerdyakov reaching, half-successfully, for a learned word.

Теперь же, может быть, они в эту самую минуту в трактире этом сидят с братцем Иваном Федоровичем, так как Иван Федорович домой обедать не приходили, а Федор Павлович отобедали час тому назад одни и теперь почивать легли.  
And now, perhaps at this very minute, they are sitting in that tavern with your brother Ivan Fyodorovich, for Ivan Fyodorovich did not come home to dine, while Fyodor Pavlovich finished his dinner an hour ago, alone, and has now lain down to rest.
> Accusative of time-point: «в эту самую минуту» ('at this very minute') takes the accusative after «в» to mark a point in time, not location. Contrast «в трактире этом сидят» in the same sentence, where «в трактире» is prepositional for location.
> Diminutive «братец»: «братец» is the affectionate-deferential diminutive of «брат». In the servant's mouth, addressing Alyosha about Ivan, it carries an ingratiating warmth — 'your dear brother'.
> «отобедать» and «почивать» — genteel verbs: «отобедать» (perfective, 'to finish dining') and especially «почивать» ('to repose, take one's rest', a polite-archaic word for sleeping) are deferential verbs reserved for a master. They lift Fyodor Pavlovich's nap into the dignified register of the household.

Убедительнейше, однако, прошу, чтобы вы им про меня и про то, что я сообщил, ничего не говорили-с, ибо они ни за что убьют-с.  
I most earnestly beg you, however, to say nothing to him about me or about what I have told you, sir, for he would kill me without a second thought, sir."
> Superlative adverb «убедительнейше»: A bookish superlative adverb in «-ейше», 'most earnestly/persuasively', built on the same «-ейш-» that forms elevated superlative adjectives. The elaborate politeness is comic against the menace it precedes.
> Negative command via «чтобы» + negative concord: After «прошу», «чтобы… не говорили» is an indirect request taking the past-form irrealis. «ничего… не» shows negative concord — the «ни»-word and the verb's «не» both stand, one negation in meaning.
> Bookish «ибо» and «ни за что»: «ибо» is an archaic-literary 'for, because', loftier than «потому что» — incongruous in the lackey's mouth. «ни за что» ('for nothing, on no account') is an «ни»-idiom meaning here 'without a moment's hesitation'; «убьют» is perfective future ('will [certainly] kill').

— Брат Иван звал Дмитрия сегодня в трактир? — быстро переспросил Алеша  
"Brother Ivan asked Dmitri to the tavern today?" Alyosha asked again, quickly.
> Perfective «переспросил» with «пере-»: The prefix «пере-» on «спросил» gives 'to ask again, to ask back over', capturing Alyosha's quick re-checking of what he just heard. Perfective past, a single completed act, with the adverb «быстро» pinning its speed.

— Это точно так-с.  
"That is exactly so, sir."
> «точно так» — just so: «точно так» is a set affirmative, 'exactly so, just so' — the standard subordinate's confirming reply, capped again with the servile «-с».

— В трактир «Столичный город», на площади?  
"To the tavern 'The Metropolis,' on the square?"

— В этот самый-с.  
"That very one, sir."
> Elliptical accusative reply: A clipped answer echoing Alyosha's «в трактир»: «в этот самый» ('to that very [one]') keeps the accusative of motion-toward, the noun «трактир» understood. The «-с» again seals the deference.

— Это очень возможно! — воскликнул Алеша в большом волнении. — Благодарю вас, Смердяков, известие важное, сейчас пойду туда.  
"That is quite possible!" exclaimed Alyosha in great agitation. "Thank you, Smerdyakov; this is important news, I'll go there at once."
> Perfective future of motion «пойду»: «пойду» is the perfective future of the prefixed motion verb «пойти» — 'I'll set off (there) at once'. The prefix «по-» marks the inception of a single trip, and the conjugated perfective gives future meaning with no auxiliary.
> «известие» — a piece of news: «известие» is the bookish noun for a piece of news or intelligence (neuter, in «-ие»), weightier than «новость». Alyosha's word choice marks the gravity he attaches to it; it recurs as «Известие» opening segments 137.

— Не выдавайте-с, — проговорил ему вслед Смердяков.  
"Don't give me away, sir," Smerdyakov called after him.
> «выдавать» — to give away / betray: «выдавать» (imperfective) means 'to hand over, betray, give away (a secret or person)'. The negated imperative «не выдавайте» is Smerdyakov's plea — 'don't give me away'. Imperfective with «не» is the normal way to forbid an action.
> Dative + «вслед»: «вслед» ('after, in the wake of') takes the dative «ему» — 'said after him' as Alyosha departs. The perfective «проговорил» frames a single uttered remark.

— О нет, я в трактир явлюсь как бы нечаянно, будьте покойны.  
"Oh no, I'll turn up at the tavern as if by chance, you may set your mind at rest."
> Reflexive «явлюсь» + «как бы»: «явлюсь» is the perfective future of the reflexive «явиться» ('to appear, present oneself'); the «-ся/-сь» here is the lexicalized middle that the verb always carries. «как бы нечаянно» ('as if by accident') softens it with the hedging «как бы».
> «будьте покойны» — set your mind at rest: A polite formula, 'be easy, rest assured', using the short predicative adjective «покойны» ('calm, at peace') with the imperative of «быть». Slightly old-fashioned and reassuring.

— Да куда же вы, я вам калитку отопру, — крикнула было Марья Кондратьевна.  
"But where are you going? I'll open the gate for you," Marya Kondratyevna started to cry out.
> The frustrative particle «было»: «было» after a perfective past (here «крикнула было») marks an action begun or about to happen but interrupted or undone — 'started to cry out [but…]'. This «было» is a frozen particle, not the verb 'to be', and is a vivid feature of narrative Russian.
> «калитка» and «отопру»: A «калитка» is a small garden or yard gate set into a fence. «отопру» is the perfective future of «отпереть» ('to unlock, open'), with its characteristic stem alternation — 'I'll open the gate for you'.

— Нет, здесь ближе, я опять чрез плетень.  
"No, it's shorter this way, I'll go over the fence again."
> Archaic «чрез» + accusative, verbless: «чрез» is the bookish/poetic contraction of «через» ('over, across'), governing the accusative «плетень». The motion verb is omitted entirely — 'I'll [go] over the fence again' — a brisk colloquial ellipsis.
> «плетень» — a wattle fence: A «плетень» is a fence woven from branches or withes — the humble wattle hurdle of a Russian yard. Alyosha hops over it rather than use the gate — the same way he came in — declining Marya Kondratyevna's offer to unlock it.

Известие страшно потрясло Алешу.  
The news had shaken Alyosha terribly.
> Topic-first word order; adverb «страшно»: The known topic «Известие» ('the news') leads, the new information — that it shook him — follows, with «Алешу» (animate accusative) last. The adverb «страшно» ('terribly') is here an intensifier, not literal fright. «потрясло» is perfective: a single decisive jolt.

Он пустился к трактиру.  
He set off for the tavern.
> Reflexive «пуститься» of sudden motion: «пуститься» (perfective, reflexive «-ся») means 'to dash off, set out impulsively'. With «к» + dative «трактиру» ('toward the tavern'), it conveys Alyosha bolting away — the «-ся» here is the inceptive middle the verb carries.

В трактир ему входить было в его одежде неприлично, но осведомиться на лестнице и вызвать их, это было возможно.  
To go into the tavern dressed as he was would have been unseemly, but to inquire on the stairs and call them out — that was possible.
> Dative-subject impersonal: The construction has no nominative subject: «ему» (dative) is the one for whom it would be «неприлично» ('unseemly'), with the infinitive «входить» as the thing assessed and «было» as the neuter past linker — 'for him to go in would have been improper'.
> Prepositional of state «в одежде»: «в его одежде» ('in his [monastic] clothing') uses «в» + prepositional to describe the state he is in — the cassock that makes a tavern entrance unseemly. Contrast «в трактир» (accusative, motion-into) earlier in the line.
> Genteel «осведомиться»: «осведомиться» (perfective, reflexive) is a formal-bookish 'to make inquiry, ascertain', paired with plain «вызвать» ('to call out'). The register mirrors Alyosha's scrupulous weighing of what is and isn't permissible.

Но только что он подошел к трактиру, как вдруг отворилось одно окно и сам брат Иван закричал ему из окна вниз:  
But no sooner had he come up to the tavern than a window suddenly opened, and his brother Ivan himself called down to him from above:
> «только что… как» — no sooner… than: The correlative pair «только что… как» frames a sudden coincidence in time: 'no sooner had he come up… than [a window] opened'. Both verbs are perfective («подошёл», «отворилось»), staging two abrupt, sequential events.
> Reflexive «-ся» as intransitive 'open': «отворилось» ('[a window] opened') uses «-ся/-сь» to make «отворить» intransitive — the window opens of itself, no agent named. The verb follows its subject «окно», a presentative order that introduces the new event.
> Intensifier «сам»: «сам» ('himself, in person') intensifies «брат Иван» — it was Ivan himself, unexpectedly, who called down. Distinct from the reflexive «-ся», «сам» is a declinable emphatic agreeing with its noun.

— Алеша, можешь ты ко мне сейчас войти сюда или нет?  
"Alyosha, can you come up here to me right now, or not?
> Perfective infinitive «войти» of single entry: «войти» (perfective, prefix «в-» on the motion verb) names a single completed act of entering — 'come in (right now)'. Under the modal «можешь» it stays infinitive; «ко мне» ('to me') is «к» + dative.
> Inverted question + «или нет»: Ivan inverts to verb-first «можешь ты…?» and tags «или нет?» ('or not?') — a blunt, urgent yes/no question, brotherly and informal, addressing Alyosha with «ты».

Одолжишь ужасно.  
You'd be doing me a tremendous favor."
> «одолжить» — to oblige; «ужасно» as intensifier: «одолжишь» (perfective future of «одолжить») here means 'you'll do me a favor, oblige me'. «ужасно» ('terribly') is colloquially just 'enormously' — 'you'd oblige me no end'. The clipped one-word sentence is Ivan's offhand urgency.

— Очень могу, только не знаю, как мне в моем платье.  
"I can well enough, only I don't know how, dressed as I am."
> Elliptical dative-subject worry: «не знаю, как мне в моём платье [войти]» drops the verb: dative «мне» is the experiencer, «в моём платье» (prepositional) the state — 'I don't know how [I'm to manage], dressed as I am'. The unstated infinitive is left to the reader.
> «платье» — clothing, dress: Here «платье» means not a woman's dress but 'garb, attire' generally — Alyosha's novice's cassock. The older, broad sense of «платье» as any clothing is normal in 19th-century usage.

— А я как раз в отдельной комнате, ступай на крыльцо, я сбегу навстречу…  
"As it happens, I'm in a private room; come to the porch, I'll run down to meet you..."
> «как раз» — as it happens: «как раз» is a handy adverbial phrase, 'just, exactly, as it happens' — Ivan notes the lucky fit: he is in a private room precisely now, so the cassock won't matter.
> Imperative «ступай» + accusative of motion: «ступай» is the familiar imperative of «ступать» ('to step, go'), a brisk, slightly homey 'go, head'. «на крыльцо» is «на» + accusative for motion onto/toward the porch. «сбегу» that follows is perfective future of «сбежать» ('I'll run down').

Через минуту Алеша сидел рядом с братом.  
A minute later Alyosha was sitting beside his brother.
> Imperfective «сидел» as resulting state; «с» + instrumental: After the time-phrase «через минуту» ('a minute later'), the imperfective «сидел» paints the settled, ongoing state rather than the act of sitting down. «с братом» is «с» ('with') + instrumental — accompaniment.

Иван был один и обедал.  
Ivan was alone and dining.
> Imperfective «обедал» — background process: Both predicates are stative-imperfective: «был один» ('was alone') and «обедал» ('was dining'). The imperfective sets a quiet, ongoing scene — the standing background against which the brothers' charged conversation will unfold.
---

Source text: public domain (Fyodor Dostoevsky, d. 1881; Russian from the Nauka academic edition via ru.wikisource). English translation: original, © 1732 Studios (2026); rendered freshly from the public-domain Russian, not derived from any prior English translation. Sentence-aligned by 1732 Studios.